Kanye West Outshines Taylor Swift at MTV VMAs, Chelsea Handler Bombs

Nothing will rival the buzz stemming from last year’s MTV Video Music Awards, but as the follow-up show to the infamous Kanye West-Taylor Swift incident, the 2010 VMAs offered plenty about which to discuss. Notes from the show are detailed.

In terms of their actual performances, it is unquestionable that Taylor Swift’s 2010 MTV Video Music Awards number tugged harder on heart strings than that of Kanye West. It was an emotional ballad that gave the country-pop superstar purpose on stage; never has she looked more connected to and driven by a song, and that level of passion replaced the nervousness that often shakes up her vocals in live performances. Taylor Swift will never be Christina Aguilera, but this was not the kind of performance that will leave cynical music fans complaining about her vocal chops.

Yet for all the poignancy of Swift’s number, it is far from fair to say that she outclassed West at the awards show. West’s “Runaway,” with a chorus that included “let’s have a toast for the douchebags,” addressed last year’s incident without drifting into the “emo” mindset that has plagued some of his recent Twitter posts. He admitted his guilt and acknowledged his wrongdoing, but he situated his behavioral issues and mistakes within the confines of a bigger societal picture, rather than simply in the context of what happened in September 2009.

With that mindset, West found a way to atone for his “sins” without restricting himself to playing off the Taylor Swift incident for greater publicity. “Runaway” offers greater societal messages about the tendency to chase and offer negative qualities, and it thus reflects the fact that West underwent clear introspection–simply hearing “I forgive you” from Taylor Swift would not be enough for absolution.

The fact that West delivered such a personal, yet relatable message in an exaggerated, comedic manner (toasting for “douchebags,” “assholes,” “scumbags” and “jerkoffs”) complemented the words immensely, as it was reflective of the lyrical architecture that has defined West since his rise to stardom. Humor was also much appreciated, given how intently host Chelsea Handler tried to murder comedy over the course of the broadcast.

Obviously, some will question whether it is fair to credit West for “looking past” an incident that he caused. Taylor Swift, it will be argued, is the victim, and it is thus up to her to determine the proper emotional response to what happened on the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards stage.

That is undoubtedly true, but Swift has sacrificed some credibility and authority on the matter by offering an unclear reaction to West’s initial behavior and then attempts at making amends. Taylor Swift’s greatest strength as a songwriter is her willingness to speak honestly and wear her heart on her sleeve, and her tendency to offer mixed messages on the Kanye West issues comes as an unwelcome departure from what makes her so appealing.

Swift had never seemed too personally heartbroken by what happened and had even joked about the incident in a “Saturday Night Live” performance. Given that reaction, when news broke that Swift was performing a song about Kanye West at the VMAs this year, the assumption was that it would be a light-hearted affair (possibly involving Kanye) that remarked the “freak out” was for nothing.

But it was clear from the performance Sunday that the incident did mean something to her. And there is no reason why that is wrong or blameworthy; she was openly disrespected on national television, and she has every right to be furious about what happened. Playing it off as a non-issue in interviews and then addressing it on-stage with the most hauntingly affected performance of her career, however, is a bit more suspect. You cannot act as if you are so over the incident yet turnaround and reveal the profoundly emotional impact it had on your songwriting.

Moreover, while it seemed from the early lyrics (including the reference to “lunchbox dates”) that the song was going to be an introspective study about her own loss of innocence following the incident, later references made it obvious that Swift was instead (or at least also) singing about West. She was declaring that he, in fact, was still an innocent. That he could still be growing up at 32. For the record, she is presently 20 and was 19 at the time of the incident.

And that gets to the heart of the problem with Swift’s song. It is rarely fair to hold one’s age against his ability to pursue certain avenues of songwriting, but the age issue is an appropriate part of a bigger criticism about the focus of the songwriting on this track. Yes, Swift is forgiving West, but she is also adopting a patronizing tone towards his attitude and behavior. She is no longer simply judging whether she can move forward and accept Kanye’s apology; instead, she is judging the character of his actions and determining that even though he did something wrong and immature, he can still be innocent. Instead of keeping the song about her journey, she openly judges his actions. Simply giving an “it happens to the best of us” vibe does not change the fact that she is accusing something “bad” of happening–she is judging Kanye for a wrongdoing.

Real forgiveness is not supposed to come with a “judging” complication. It is not, “Yeah, it was a douchey move, but I don’t think you’re a terrible person.” It is, “I want to put our past animosity aside and move forward.” Swift might want to move forward, but she also felt the need to make it clear that Kanye West acted incorrectly last September. She wants to make it clear that even though she’s only 20, she feels Kanye West was not demonstrating maturity coherent with his age and thus has growing up to do. She wants to make it clear that even though SHE believes Kanye West can still be viewed as an “innocent” for what he did.

Real forgiveness is about extending your hand and asking the person to join you; it is not requiring them to walk the gauntlet prior to regaining your trust and respect.

Again, no one is faulting Taylor Swift for singing openly about how she feels. In fact, any music fan should be thanking her for carrying that particular emotional reaction, as it made for a showstopping and touching musical performance. But there is fault in writing off the issue and “taking the high road” in one instance, and then patronizingly judging the wrongdoer in another.

Adding insult to injury is the assumption that Swift played at least some role in nixing an on-air encounter between the two artists. It has not been confirmed, but as West seemed willing (he even wrote a song for Swift to perform) and MTV would have been insane not to attempt to arrange that encounter, it seems reasonable to assume she was not wild about the idea. And while Swift can be respected for not wanting to give additional publicity to the man who humiliated her on television, she should be honest about that. The speaking out of both sides of the mouth shtick just does not work here.

— Chelsea Handler was a disaster as host and undoubtedly set female comedians years back when it comes to having prominent roles in entertainment functions. Between the unnecessary vulgarity (save for Andrew Dice Clay, what male entertainer would non-chalantly offer the equivalent of wanting to “ride” Joe Manganiello’s face?), the horribly ineffective celebrity riffs and the absence of any poise and ability to keep the show flowing, Handler was simply embarrassing. She absolutely has been funny in other media, but she achieved no success converting her act to the MTV awards show realm and had no business being part of this broadcast.

Having seen what Jimmy Fallon, a frequently-panned member of the comedy community, accomplished as host of the Emmys two weeks ago, how could a performance like Handler’s be viewed as tolerable?

— Beyond Chelsea Handler’s horrific hosting effort, there was an overarching absence of comedy. Few comedians did anything on stage. There were no memorable, “laugh out loud” skits. Besides the Kanye and Taylor performances, what else would people want to catch on YouTube or DVR?

— Nothing particularly stood out about the performances. Eminem’s exaggerated facial expressions (and Rihanna’s shaky vocals) rendered the first performance ineffective. Acknowledging Justin Bieber’s lack of presence or believability as a “sex symbol” makes getting into a discussion of his talent seem like cruel and unusual punishment to the poor kid. Linkin Park deserves credit for changing the sound up slightly for “The Catalyst,” but the band just is not fantastic to watch live. Flrorence + The Machine did a solid job, but the performance (and song) was a bit too low-key to guarantee a major, long-term impact. The other performances were just by-the-numbers MTV showings; no one did anything to get people talking (besides Kanye West and Taylor Swift, but anything they did would have made headlines).