It's not a bursary; it's an award: Why Drake deserves the Polaris Music Prize

I know there are those who are already offended by this article’s very headline. I can hear the ranting now: “How can an artist like Drake be deserving of such a prize? He’s a millionaire. He doesn’t need the money!’

As a former juror, I’ve heard this argument over and over – and I’m tired of it.

Drake’s record is unquestionably the best on the shortlist. Sure, there are albums on it that are more sonically adventurous, but that doesn’t always translate into a solid record.

A truly great album isn’t just a pastiche of sounds thrown together around a smattering of hit singles. The tracks should transition seamlessly. It should have absolutely no filler, the track list should make sense, and if you were to remove one song, the record would suffer because it would no longer be a cohesive whole. An album should say something. You should be able to put it on and it shouldn’t lose you halfway through. Not only that, it should be worthy of your stereo’s repeat button.

Of all the albums on this year’s shortlist, Nothing Was the Same is that record. It is massive leap forward for someone who had, until now, been known almost entirely for boast-filled, egotistical raps that said little to nothing about who he was and what he wanted to do as an artist. Drake’s music has never been as good as it is on his latest long-player.

While it’s true that the idea behind ‘Started from the Bottom’ is a bit ridiculous since Drake wanted for nothing as a child, it seems he’s finally produced the closest thing to what one could call an artist statement with the record. We finally get a good idea of who he is.

He’s still boastful, but he acknowledges that he came from somewhere by paying tribute to his influences on "Wu-Tang Forever.” He also spends a good portion of the record showing off his softer side. “Hold On, We’re Going Home” - which will go down as one of the best songs of the decade - melds rap with R&B in a way that hasn’t been done this well since the '90s. The mournful “Too Much” drips with late-night melancholy and moodiness that we haven’t yet seen from him.

The record displays an astounding depth of emotion and artistic range. Simply put, it’s one of the best rap albums of the decade. If you want the tl;dr version: Nothing Was the Same is a masterwork. But saying that, to a lot of people, is a problem.

According to the prize’s official website, its goal is to award a Canadian album released over the last year that displays the “highest artistic integrity, without regard to musical genre, professional affiliation, or sales history, as judged by a panel of selected music critics.”

There is still an argument that the Polaris Music Prize should be to promote up-and-coming talent, and ensure those who need the money most can get it. But that is not the point of the award, and it never has been.

“It helps more than just emerging artists,” says Steve Jordan, the Polaris Music Prize’s founder. “When Feist and Arcade Fire won, sales of their record spiked months after those titles had been out.”

One could conclude that if larger artists like Arcade Fire and Feist see a sales spike, the same thing would happen with a smaller artist like Patrick Watson. But people still argue larger artists shouldn’t win the prize, claiming smaller acts deserve the money more and would benefit from it most. Even if this is true, it still misses the point.

Yes, it’s entirely the case that an artist who’s sold millions of albums wouldn’t notice $30,000, whereas someone like Patrick Watson can use it to buy a new van, which is a huge improvement in “quality of life” for that act. But again, that’s also beside the point. It’s an award, not a bursary, and there’s the possibility for people to get upset either way.

“When our jury picks obscure artists the opposite happens and we hear criticism that ‘your jury favours only the obscure,’” Jordan says. “It goes both ways. So really, all we can do is reiterate our objective.”

One way to push back against this “smaller acts need the money more’” argument is to state that the same types of 'indie rock always make the short list year after year. This has been another criticism of Polaris since the beginning.

This isn’t to argue that an artist shouldn’t be repeatedly nominated because, again, that misses the point of the award. But if we’re going to strive to recognize the best Canadian album, shouldn’t Polaris be about more than just indie rock?

The past few shortlists have been an improvement on this and have diversified by including acts like Tanya Tagaq and much more hip-hop. But every year, the winner has been rock artist or an indie group, with the exception of Owen Pallett (whose own fanbase is very much indie).

Again, the point of the prize is not to award someone from a different genre every year, but - and this is a big but - since the point is to recognize the best Canadian record, one could argue that great albums from genres other than indie risk being overlooked.

Drake’s record is unquestionably the best, and it would help the prize finally branch out. A musician’s success and the size of their fan base doesn’t mean they have no artistic worth, and anyway, it’s about time a rap record won.

Zach Harper is a transgender journalist and music writer from Toronto. They are the former associate editor of Chartattack.com, and they were a Polaris Music Prize juror from 2009 to 2011.