James Morrison

I guess the fear of these music critics is that as the mediatisation of music keeps developing and the spheres of the live and the mediated keep on merging, even the ‘natural and real’ performances such as the acoustic performances of say James Morrison will too be able to be simulated to look ‘authentically real’.

As I was thinking about this topic, my thoughts kept changing.

If the fans enjoy it is there anything wrong with this type of performance? It’s entertainment and entertainment comes in many forms. The mass media is a trick of the eye and the ear. If consumers are looking for the authentic, the real, it may not be in existence anymore in popular culture. Buy a guitar and learn to play it, then you’ll have authenticity, unless it’s an ELECTRIC GUITAR.
Authenticity can be in the eye of the beholder, as technology advances, definitions change. Who knows, in 50 years everyone might be lip-syncing and that’ll be authentic because some other people are using robots to sing for them.

If the Grammy’s are having a problem with ‘simulation’ perhaps some stricter guidelines or criteria should be made as to who can with these awards. There are so many genres of music how can someone be ‘best new artist’? Is it fair to compare a group that can play music and one that only sings? The creation of the music is just as important as the singing itself. Milli Vanilli lip-synced. It was deceptive because it’s assumed that pop stars sing. But at the end of the day it’s just entertainment and that’s what consumers want. Critics should stick with classical if they’re so concerned about music authenticity.
I have to say I do like it when a singer can actually sing, and I think if you like ‘authenticity’ (James Morrison sorts) you have to go and seek that kind out. However there the problem occurs because now there’s a fear that even singers like these can be impersonated, simulated.