Natalie Cole: Amy Winehouse's Grammy wins send a 'bad message'

**witchcurlgirl** · February 13th, 2008, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by buttmunch

I'm not romanticising addicts or drug users, I'm just saying I'm inclined to like them better than the Pollyanna's out there.

Except there is a bit of a difference between a drug user and a junkie.

I use drugs socially and have for ages.

But I avoid junkies like the plague. I don't judge them, everyone has their own issues. But a real junkie can't be trusted. They'll lie, steal, whore, even kill....whatever it takes to get their fix. They may be interesting, but my personal preference is to keep them at a distance. I've known too many up close.

Mel-The kids are very lucky to have your brother. Poor guy, it's a lot for one person to carry

**pacific breeze** · February 13th, 2008, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by buttmunch

I don't agree that he wasn't a nice man. He struck me as a very complex man struggling with his issues. A fuck up in some ways but infinitely interesting...and I'd rather be interesting than nice.

I agree it's better to be interesting than nice and I too have issues with authority. But...what kind of man shoots his wife in the head, killing her, as a party trick like Burroughs did? He may have been interesting and talented, but he was still a major-league asshole to most people, including his son, Billy. You can be complex and struggling and still be a jerk. Lots of artists are like that. He mellowed somewhat with age, but we'll have to agree to disagree on the nature of his character.

**Mel1973** · February 13th, 2008, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by GawsipRawksz

i hope DAD stands for some type of drug

Oh no, he snorted his dad's ashes after he was cremated..

**MissVenus** · February 13th, 2008, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by HWBL

I'll tell ya what I think sends a bad message:
when marginally or UNtalented siblings or offspring
of really talented people get careers in the biz,
based 99% on the promise of their relation to said
talented person.
Natalie Cole has always sounded like a cat trapped
down a drainpipe (remember the seventies "hit"
"This will be"?). She only got her grammy's for
being the late great Nat's offspring and for the
great production of her "Unforgettable" album.
Her vocals were NOT the reason for her win.

Here here!

Natalie Cole only ever got a look in to the industry cause of who her father was... who is she kidding with this 'undeserving' crap!

*DIVA! · February 14th, 2008, 02:13 AM

Billy Johnson Jr. thoughts:

And just because I'm all pumped up, I think I should also toss a couple words in Natalie Cole's direction.
Man. Aretha and Natalie are two of my favorites. I'm telling you. I love some Natalie Cole. Baby Girl, you are underrated. You have some of my favorite songs?
But why are you hating on Amy Winehouse? (news)
Why?
What did she do to you?
Why do you think the Grammys were wrong for giving her those awards?
Because she's on drugs?
Is that it?
Natalie, we are not talking about Britney Spears here.
I don't care that Sharon Jones And The Dap Kings are getting shaft and not receiving the credit they deserve for being Amy's backing band. I love them too. But don't try to act like you don't like "Rehab."
Don't try to act like you weren't surprised when you found out that "Rehab" was some blue-eyed soul?
Let the moral courts judge Amy. But the Grammys is supposed to recognize the most outstanding recorded works in the related categories. If you are implying that Amy's work is not worth recognition, you are wrong. How about you go back to the height of your own drug issues and return all the awards you received during that time? How would you feel if your honors were erased from the history books?
We are all proud that you were able to overcome your own bought with drugs. You're looking good Natalie. Try to meet with Amy. Talk to her. Tell her your story. Maybe you can help her.
Just don't do her dirty like Dr. Phil did Britney.
Don't be a hater.
And that's the message for the day. It's for both you and Aretha.
Stop the hateration.
You are legends and you're setting a bad example.

**buttmunch** · February 14th, 2008, 02:41 AM

However, my original point in this thread, before all this drug talk was that the Grammy's are irrelevant. They have proved this over and over again. So what does it possibly matter what Natalie Cole thinks, or whether or not Amy "deserved" the awards.....It's all bullshit. The only things that matter are the $$$. It's a business.

Hmmm...I've been thinking about this because I keep reading in the press that the Grammy's are irrelevant and you're saying they're irrelevant but I'm not sure that's not just wishful thinking. I mean, the press for the past few days has had articles saying how irrelevant the Grammy's are alongside multiple articles about who won, should they have won, who said what, what the awards mean, etc. And here at GR, we've been discussing them fairly heavily. So perhaps the death knell has been sounded a bit prematurely.

**sprynkles** · February 14th, 2008, 02:50 AM

I think I have a wee crush on Amy for some reason.
She has the most adorable facial expressions at times.

**buttmunch** · February 14th, 2008, 02:54 AM

Yeah, I can see that. She's extremely confident when she's singing but as soon as she stops she seems to morph almost into a shy little girl. Watching her Grammy performance mr. butt and I decided that the only time she looks confident is when she's singing, which might explain some of her issues.

Oh, and William Burroughs, when he shot his wife doing the 'party trick', did so at the behest of his wife, who was a major league junkie herself.

**Chimera** · February 14th, 2008, 05:22 AM

I'm holding my breath just waiting for the next crazy Amy pictures.

**sweetness** · February 14th, 2008, 08:46 AM

Originally Posted by sprynkles

I think I have a wee crush on Amy for some reason.
She has the most adorable facial expressions at times.

Yeah, I agree. People make fun of her looks, but I think she's a doll.

**witchcurlgirl** · February 14th, 2008, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by buttmunch

Hmmm...I've been thinking about this because I keep reading in the press that the Grammy's are irrelevant and you're saying they're irrelevant but I'm not sure that's not just wishful thinking. I mean, the press for the past few days has had articles saying how irrelevant the Grammy's are alongside multiple articles about who won, should they have won, who said what, what the awards mean, etc. And here at GR, we've been discussing them fairly heavily. So perhaps the death knell has been sounded a bit prematurely.

Unless the awards translate into $, then they don't matter. There aren't spikes in record sales after the awards because in the digital age the music has already enjoyed worldwide distribution. People don't even buy music anymore.

Artisically they really are a joke.

Prince has 7 grammy's. The Beatles have 5. Amy now has 5. There's a bit of a dicrepency. Toto also has 5. Remember them? B.J. Thomas has 5. Good Lord!

Natalie Cole has 7. More than Amy, more than the Beatles. Something strange there.

The song "Alley Cat"-an instumental- beat out "The Loco Motion", "Duke of Earl", "Louie Louie", "Twist and Shout", and "Up On the Roof" for best Rock n Roll Record

Dylan didn't even get a grammy until 1979, and even then it was for best Gospel Performance

**sputnik** · February 14th, 2008, 04:31 PM

the grammys are a joke.

**buttmunch** · February 16th, 2008, 09:09 AM

I think the Grammy's mean something different than they used to, meaning thier relevance has altered but then all celbrity-dom has altered and awards shows are no different. The interesting thing was that I was at a dinner part last night and someone brought up Amy Winehouse winning the Grammy's and said they thought it was wrong. And at least half the people at the table agreed wth her. Thus a major discussion ensued, resulting in me telling said woman that she shouldn't be looking to celebs to be role models for her kid, she should teach him that these people are interesting but certainly not there to emulate. Suffice to say dinner party was a wee uncomfortable after that. But I*m still shocked that grown, intelligent people think someone should be penalized for thier personal hapbits in an industry rife with addiction.

**sparkly** · February 16th, 2008, 05:07 PM

Natalie Cole needs to step off her soapbox. Considering how long Natalie was addicted to drugs, Amy Winehouse's problems were nothing more than a blip in time, and at least she got help quickly. No one ravaged Natalie when she was in the media forcing her untalented ass down our throats, all the while doing who knows what backstage. And she would never have had that opportunity had she not pimped out the fact that her daddy was Nat King Cole. And Amy Winehouse made it completely on her own. Jealous, much?

**witchcurlgirl** · February 19th, 2008, 09:02 AM

Originally Posted by buttmunch

Thus a major discussion ensued, resulting in me telling said woman that she shouldn't be looking to celebs to be role models for her kid, she should teach him that these people are interesting but certainly not there to emulate.

That's a statement I agree with 100%