Sampha over Ed Sheeran, English Teacher over Charli XCX, Sam Fender over CMAT — spot the odd one out. Sam Fender recently won the inaugural Mercury Prize for his album People Watching, beating out the likes of Wolf Alice, Fontaines DC, PinkPanthress and Emma Jean-Mackay in the process, all whilst adding another piece of silverware to his ever-growing trophy cabinet. But is this award truly deserved?
The very crux of the Mercury Prize is to “promote the best of UK and Irish music,” recognise “artistic achievement across a range of contemporary music genres”, and “help introduce new albums from a range of music genres to a wider audience,” whilst rewarding them with £25,000 in the process. The award has often been cited as the direct antithesis of the BRITs, celebrating artistic value and experimentation over commercial success and chart popularity. Alongside the £25,000 prize pot, in previous years’ recipients of the Mercury Prize have benefitted greatly from the publicity garnered; in 2008, Elbow’s The Seldom Seen Kid saw a 700 per cent increase in sales, whilst PJ Harvey’s Let England Shake — 2011’s winner— jumped 157 places on the charts to 24th.
But does Fender, whose summer consisted of stadiums across the UK, really need introducing? It feels almost laughable that an award show, set up on such a stark anti-populist agenda, gives its sole accolade to, arguably, Britain’s most mainstream male artist at the moment. If the Mercury Prize, too, begins to cater to mainstream allegiances and commercial success, what differentiates it from the BRITS? What’s the point of its existence? Arguably, the prize money could have been vastly better utilised by other artists to support grassroots musicians— half the point of the prize. The £25,000 would have allowed them to purchase additional musical equipment, fund marketing campaigns, and gain access to better production facilities.
Some may argue that Fender wholeheartedly deserves the award; People Watching is a a euphoric work of art that beautifully marries stadium-worthy, Springsteen-esque rock with diaristic social commentary regarding the, often, bleak realities of growing up working class, in Northern England— his pre-established popularity should not detract from his artistry. However this slightly ignores the very crux of the issue, which is placing this within the broader context.
Fender was crowned in Newcastle’s Utilita Arena, a home-coming victory that raised eyebrows and accusations of being a fix, but equally marked the first year the event was held outside of London, with such London-centrism being a frequent point of criticism. The awards venture outside of the M25 is a thoroughly welcomed change and was undertaken in the hopes of renewing interest in the prize, after 2024’s run had no financial sponsor. In fact, last year’s winner, English Teacher, hailing from Leeds, was the first non-Londoner to win the award since 2010, Fender’s win makes such a feat back-to-back. Unsurprisingly, there exists a niggling sentiment amongst viewers that such a homecoming victory story of a man, undoubtedly at the peak of his career, seems all too convenient for a boost of publicity. This viewpoint, however, follows the contours of cynicism and remains unfounded, however, it still evidences the awkward-ness of Fender receiving the award alongside attempts at a revival of interest.
Alas, perhaps this is too harsh, perhaps Fender deserves it — the album is great after all — and as aforementioned such greatness remains the key caveat for success. But so are all the other albums nominated. Ultimately, if Fender’s legacy at the Mercury Prize is to be aiding the detraction of the prize’s London-centrism,maybe his victory is a compromise I’m willing to make.
“Sam Fender Leeds 2019” by Richard Nicholson from Melbourne, Victoria, Australia is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.