It seems that judges/voters/whoever are still stuck on old favorites. I think we have a bit too much of a tendency in Canada to find what we like and stick with it, instead of exploring the new. I’m really happy that the Tragically Hip are not on the list though.

It might be possible to broaden things a bit by recruiting more metal writers, or black music specialists, or jazzbos, or whatever, but given the overall numbers I kinda doubt such affirmative action will ultimately make a difference. Truth is, an awful lot of people who write about (or program, or promote) music are essentially specialists, with one area they know well and appreciate deeply, and many areas they don’t know and couldn’t care less about. The Polaris consensus simply reflects that reality.

But hey — it’s a better consensus than the Junos, right? And would the equivalent of a Fucked Up or Malajube have made the Mercury short list? That the Polaris system is imperfect may be a given, but it’s an improvement over the competition nonetheless.

It seems to me that the idea informing the prize (that the best album, based on “artistic merit”, should win) is directly at odds with the popularity and widespread appeal necessary to have the award and its financial prize possible in the first place. When you ask upwards of 150 music industry professionals, many of whom work for major mainstream outlets such as Much Music or the CBC, to vote in such a manner, you’re very likely to end up with just these sort of middle-of-the-road, accessible indie rock and folk acts. So what’s the solution? Cull the most discerning and credible critics from the list and risk alienating broader audiences? My favorite long-list nominee was Tim Hecker, but I was never deluded enough to believe he’d make the next round–there are simply too few people, even those working in the industry, interested in ambient noise music to vote that way. Such is the nature of an award with such a broad scope; anything difficult, obscure, or diverse will fail to make the cut.