Rock n Roll hall of Fame-WHAT THE HELL? (1 Viewer)

[Grant B]

It looks like a fine place for that great quote by Groucho

 

[Jan H]

So how does this work, then? Sabbath has been eligible for 10 years and they're not in? Rush has been eligible for 6 and they're not? Sex Pistols for 5? Hmmmm, sounds more and more like the American sports HOFs every day. It should be thus: either you're a Hall of Famer in your first year of eligibility or you should never get in. Simple as that. Black Sabbath is the Gil Hodges of rock and roll.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Did you know that Hank Williams, Jimmie Rogers and Bob Wills are also members of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? That's only a few of the country artists who crossed over in genres and thus, were so influential that they were recognized in both Halls. Also, not all inductees are in the Hall as performers. Many are in for being early influences, side men and non-performers. For a HOF that's only been in existence a little over 20 years, I think they're doing a fine job. Are some of the inductions questionable? Sure some are, but overall, I think they've been pretty good in their selections.

 

[Chris Soprano]

Why in the world isn't Deep Purple in? They would've become eligible way back in 1993. They seem like an obvious choice that should've been inducted the 1st year they were eligible. Saw them live last year in Denver and they still rock. And RUSH most definitely should have gone in 1999. And Chicago also. And the Moody Blues. And others I'm sure I'll think of later.

 

[Grant B]

Yes and fine choices too but I think there is a difference too.
Without these 3 RnR would not be what it is today. They started even before the term exixted.
But can you say that about Brenda Lee? I don't think so.
Once something is established there are few major driving and I don't recall "The Benda Lee" era.... or even the spat of artists emulating the "Brenda Lee Style"
Major Artsts today in rock that say she is a major influnce???


I can't say she fits at all.
Some artists that turn things upside down,
The 3 big ones that come to mind are:
The Beatles (Yes!)
Sex Pistols (See Brenda Lee about it)
Nirvana (A shoe In)

Beatles swept the bad pop that took over when the greats like Elvis, Chuch Berry Jerry Lee went under for various reassns.
Sex Pistols swept away a lot of the 'ONE SONG PER SIDE' bands that had got popular but killed nightclubs and dancing.

The Hair Metal bands went from on top of the charts to playing backwater joints when Nirvana hit.

There are more many to lesser degrees

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Why WOULD they be in? One well-known song isn't a lot to get them into the HOF. And yeah, they may have been together a while, but they had little lasting impact during that period.

Everybody wants their personal faves to be in, but that's not enough. Heck, I loved Big Country for their entire career, and they were around long enough to argue longevity, but no way I'd expect them to make the HOF in 2008 - they just weren't important enough to enough people...

 

[Henry Gale]

Yeah but, "HUSH" was really a good song.

 

[Max F]

OK, guitar players (i'm not one, but lived with a few): What guitar riffs do most people learn first.

1. Smoke on the Water - Deep Purple
2. Iron Man - Black Sabbath

Anyone with an electric guitar learned these songs first and yet neither of these bands are in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. Tragic.

Oh yeah Deep Purple had Space Truckin, Lazy, and that song that goes... nobodies going to take my car, blah, blah, blah... good stuff. My Mom saw Deep Purple with Jethro Tull and said that was the best show she had ever seen. The only show she ever walk out of: Black Sabbath. Maybe thats why i like them so much

 

[John McM]

I have to make one comment.

Why do people have to be fan-nazis against genres of music they dislike? it's pretty sad so many people have such closed minds against other types of music, instead of accepting there's good in every genre. People who like heavy metal are bashing soul and pop music. I am sorry, but you cannot say that acts like The Temptations, Aretha Franklin and The Bee Gees do not merit being in the HOF. I know Bee Gees were hated big time in the 80's during the disco backlash, but THE BACKLASH IS OVER. Soul, Motown and Pop artists who are memorable, legendary and stood the test of time deserve to be in. Just because you'd rather listen to Slayer than The Four Tops doesn't suddenly mean that Motown music is bad, it just means it's not your preferred taste.

Also, people keep bashing rock bands that might not be their cup of tea, but failing to realize they are many peoples taste. The Cure and Black Sabbath both deserve to be in the HOF and just because someone who dismisses metal as rubbish hates Sabbath doesn't suddenly negate their belonging.

BTW, The Human League doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the breath alongside one hit wonder groups, I am willing to bet the people who trashed them in favor of The Cure has never heard their pre-Dare albums.

 

[TheLongshot]

I think the issue here isn't "dislike" so to speak, but the amount of bands in a given genre who are in. The fact that all of these Motown bands are getting in, but no representative of Heavy Metal (Sabbath) or a bunch of Progressive Rock bands (Yes, ELP, King Crimson).

I'm not saying that the artists that are being critisized shouldn't be in, but there are probably other groups that aren't in that should be.

Jason

 

[Bren_Chris]

I cannot imagine Robert Fripp standing at the podium, backed by a dozen ex-Crimson members, putting up with the glitzy gladhanding, throwing a wink at Catherine Zeta Jones, reading a half-hour speech about the vampiric nature of rock audiences, etc. But progressive rock has been taboo for almost three decades now, and I don't think Yes or Genesis or even Rush has the requisite hipness to earn HOF approval. If Roxy Music isn't there yet (or are they?), then they'll never wheel out Greg Lake on a golden rickshaw to crack gravel-voiced drug jokes. I think you can make your predictions based on which bands have been critical darlings or not. At least as many people were influenced by Rush as Talking Heads, but Rolling Stone loved the Heads, and despised (or ignored) Rush, so there you go.

I have nothing against the many R&B artists who have been approved, except that they're not really rock and roll, are they? But that's a useless topic.

 

[John McM]

well, I think the Heads get the treatment they get, along with The Police, is because they broke up when people were still hungry for more music. If Rush called it a day after Moving Pictures or Signals, they would be regarded in that legendary league. Same as if The Police had stayed together and recorded more records, people probably wouldn't have been as fond of them because they went out on top, instead of limping along.

Sorta like the Nirvana/Pearl Jam comparisons. They both got equal acclaim in 1992, but Nirvana ended so soon and people would've loved it if Kurt lived to do more music, whereas Pearl Jam actually have stayed around, so the appreciation level for them is lower than Nirvana because Nirvana ended when people were still hungry.

 

[Bren_Chris]

I agree that the Police had the perfect rock/pop career: five unique albums, surrounded by worldwide touring, then saying goodnight. Leave 'em wanting more. They were three of a perfect pair.

But I don't know how this affects HOF votes. If Rush had given up in '82, the hip rock critics would still hate them. Meanwhile, U2 is still writing the same songs over and over....only the studio filters change.

 

[WillG]

That's pretty much it in a nutshell. I would think Rolling Stone the barometer of who gets in.

 

[Sean A]

The Thing that I noticed about the inductees to the RRHOF is that they are either very well known (Elvis, Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Supremes, Aretha, Temptations,Led Zep, Paul Simon, Police, U2, Prince) OR
they are hip critics darlings (Velvet Underground, Bowie, Neil Young, Elvis Costello, Talking Heads, Ramones, Clash).

A lot of the acts that people are mentioning (whatever their individual merits) , simply don't fit in based on these "criteria". Acts like Yes, Moody Blues,Sabbath, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Deep Purple, Rush, etc, are not "mainstream" or well known enough to be hugely popular, nor cultish enough to be critical favorites. In fact, what I noticed about a lot of the acts people here are mentioning is that their music is very "divisive": not politically or idiologically, but in the sense that people either love them or hate them. Nobody is really indifferent to , say, Rush or Yes. If they heard of them, a listener will have a strong opinion yay or nay.

I think Lynyrd Skynyrd is a special case. Perhaps their "redneck" image and whiff of "racism" (whether deserved or not) has probably conspired to keep them out

 

[Rob Willey]

I just can't take seriously a HOF that doesn't include Lynyrd Skynyrd (and several others mentioned in this thread).

Rob

 

[George See]

I have a guitar and I did not learn those songs first.

By your logic then Stone Temple Pilots should be in the HOF because I learned plush first.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Correction: Bowie is both a "hip critic's darling" AND "very well known". Besides, many of the acts you mentioned as "very well known" are also beloved by critics...

 

[John McM]

thanks, you beat me to the punch. Bowie is definately both

 

[Geremia P.]

I had a Rolling Stone record guide in the mid-80s. They gave every existing AC/DC album one-star.

I believe they were inducted last year.