I think we can all agree that, by and large, the Grammys are at best a joke, the Best New Artist category frequently the punchline, with 1990’s fiasco of giving the award to Milli Vanilli the biggest howler of all. Still, watching that video raises an important question, which it seems to me a blog is the best place to answer: if not Milli Vanilli, who? As much as that might seem like a philosophical question, it’s really about the other nominees that year. They deserved at least an equal shot at the award. (If you watch the video of Rob’s and Fab’s performance, you might say that Milli Vanilli’s shot should’ve been immediately revoked. K reminds me that they always danced like that, which besides being one of the most incredible things I’ve heard in months, also begs the question, by the shame of that heel-toe shuffle, why anyone could have believed they weren’t fake?)

Keeping in mind that the “Best New Artist” category is often judged primarily by virtue of album or record sales. That’s why the other nominees that year weren’t all that. Neneh Cherry’s nomination, for example, wasn’t based on the fact that she was Swedish and might become the next ABBA. It was based on the fact that “Buffalo Stance” (below) reached No. 3 in the Billboard charts:

Also nominated that year was soon-to-be lesbian superduo the Indigo Girls, unique for the fact that they actually played instruments. Here they are playing “Closer to Fine” at some awards banquet:

Soul II Soul, which apparently disappeared from the U.S. after “Back to Life” (below) played incessantly, went on to a snazzy U.K. career.

Finally, there was Tone Loc, who, in spite of the fact I thought he was the height of awesomeness when I was 13, I realized this morning was just ridiculous. Here’s “Funky Cold Medina”:

In other words, in addition to Milli Vanilli, nominated in 1990 was one international one-hit enigma, one lesbian superduo, one British postpunk/postpop band thing, and Tone Loc. It’s clear that the lesbians are the obvious choice, right?

Comments