RRHOF inductees........go, Alice

I agree with Amazon (never though I would but there you have it). Only musicians can choose musicians? Sure, then only American presidents can criticise Bush, and only German dictators can say whether Hitler was fair or not.

Yeah, I really don't think that being a musician would be a good criteria for being a selector at the RRHOF.  It might mean the inclusion of great acts that generally get more respect from their fellows than from the general public, but it'd probably just descend into a big fat circlejerk.  Musicians start inducting each other in return for earlier favours done, or as an opportunity to mend fences - before you know it, fucking Nickelback would get inducted, and no one would even be able to figure out whose fault it was.

Having the selectors being purely musicians would make no more or less sense than ensuring that there were no musicians doing the selecting at all.  It would be nice if they could hire people who don't have their heads firmly planted up their arses.  There are too many acts being inducted - too many that don't deserve it - and far too many people not getting inducted who bloody should be.  It can't get any fucking simpler than that.

Madonna.  Fucking Madonna.  Do I even need to spell out the problem here?

Zebonka12 wrote: "That's because a lot of artists are emotionally unstable and gobble up validation like free candy! It doesn't matter if they value the thing. Of course they're going to value it; everyone knows the Academy Awards are a steaming pile, but it's all very different when they finally slap one on you. Who's going to turn down a room full of people saying that (literally) you were the best this year? Only people with a assload of integrity; that's a pretty short list."


The thing is however one could say that about all awards. Since awards, by their nature, are subjective, one could all awards meaningless. Personally, I don't. While the Oscars are extremely flawed, I don't pretend that they are not the most prestigious cinematic awards in the world. Which they are. The Nobel prizes are extremely problematic, but I'm not going to deny their importance. That isn't to say that I will agree with every winner; I just won't throw the baby out with the bathwater. So, I'm delighted that Black Sabbath got into the Hall (even though it was 11 years too late), and I'm pleased George Harrison has been inducted as a solo artist. I'm also pleased that the Hall does not only induct rock artists.

"it is to awards ceremonies what Rolling Stone Magazine is to music literature."

The difference between the two is that there is no comparable hall of fame in music. With Rolling Stone, there are numerous other publications.

"It's rubbish, and it will remain that way for all time, unless they ditch some of the 'artists' that have been inducted, and get the ones in there who deserve recognition (we know who they are)."

Except that it's subjective. I know that I would be shocked if Guns 'N Roses never get inducted; you probably would disagree. I also know that plenty of people were disgusted that ABBA got inducted, while my only complaint was that they should have been inducted earlier.

"before you know it, fucking Nickelback would get inducted, and no one would even be able to figure out whose fault it was.'

:D I doubt that Nickelback will ever get inducted, and nor should they. I am a fan, but they don't deserve to be inducted at all. But then again, Bon Jovi and Kiss have been nominated. That's right, Kiss. I think it's an absolute travesty that Kiss has been nominated, unlike an arist like Deep Purple which has never been nominated.

"Having the selectors being purely musicians would make no more or less sense than ensuring that there were no musicians doing the selecting at all. It would be nice if they could hire people who don't have their heads firmly planted up their arses. There are too many acts being inducted - too many that don't deserve it - and far too many people not getting inducted who bloody should be. It can't get any fucking simpler than that."

There is no doubt that they could improve the process. While I don't think that being non-musicians is problematic, I agree with you that they shouldn't automatically be non-musicians either. Ideally, some would be musicians, some would be music journalists or critics, some would be historians, some would be less cleanly categorised.

"Madonna. Fucking Madonna. Do I even need to spell out the problem here?"

While I don't own any of her solo stuff, and while her 'controversial' persona pisses the hell out of me (OMG Madonna kissed a girl!), I do think she deserves her induction.

But Madonna's not a rock artist, so she shouldn't be in the Rock 'n' Roll HOF. She should be in the Pop HOF (if there's ever one). Or should Pavarotti be inducted? Maria Callas? Art Tatum? Miles Davis? Edin Karamazov? John Williams (both)?

The RRHOF just keeps hitting new lows year after year.

Rush, Yes, Depeche Mode, The Cure (and the list goes on and on) have never been nominated, and yet LL Cool J who is pretty much as "has been" in the hip-hop world get nominated?

There's a huge progressive rock bias on the RRHoF because most of the people who vote on who should be inducted are critics from magazines like Rolling Stone, who always bashed progressive bands because they thought they were being too over the top and pretentious.

Does it come to anyone's surprise that a lot more punk acts have made into the Hall?

Sebastian wrote: "But Madonna's not a rock artist, so she shouldn't be in the Rock 'n' Roll HOF. She should be in the Pop HOF (if there's ever one)."


The point is that the Hall, for good or for bad (I say good) does not simply induct rock arists. In fact a large number of inductees are not rock artists; the Beach Boys, Aretha Franklin, Sam Cooke, Marvin Gaye and any number of great soul singers, Sly and the Family Stone, Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five, ABBA, Michael Jackson etc... Michael was in fact inducted twice, as a member of the Jackson Five and as a solo artist.

"Or should Pavarotti be inducted? Maria Callas? Art Tatum? Miles Davis? Edin Karamazov? John Williams (both)?"

Miles Davis is in the Hall as a matter of fact.

I stand corrected then. But in that case, IMO, they should change the name. Billboard HOF or Popular Music HOF would be less misleading.

Yes, I agree that renaming it something like the Popular Music Hall of Fame would be more accurate. However I suspect the reason they have the current name is that, annoyingly, rock has become generic. I remember a few years ago one of the magazines (forgot which one) did a special on 'female rock stars.' Except, here's the thing. None (or almost none) of them were rock artists! Rock has just become a generic label, and it also is one that awards credibility. If Madonna is a popstar, she's dismissed in the eyes of some, but as a rockstar, she becomes more respected. It also may give the Hall more credibility than it otherwise may have had. Finally, there have been quite a few artists whose careers may have included rock, or was mostly rock, but also explored other musical forms.

Amazon wrote:

"their being non-musicains does not make them non-experts."

Of course not.  But musicians and music psychologists understand what makes good music and why we like it in a way that non-musicians cannot.  I'm not suggesting that the panel should consist purely of musicians, but there should be one or two music experts in there (someone like Alan Cross) who could make a sound judgment based on their expertise in the field.

"It sounds good, it looks good, it tastes good" ... these are not good enough reasons to select things for being the best in any category.  If anyone makes such a decision, or at least has a significant say in such decisions, it should people who are experts in the respective fields.  Who wouldn't take a chef's word as to what the best restaurant in the city is?

Sebastian wrote:

"then only American presidents can criticise Bush, and only German dictators can say whether Hitler was fair or not."

I see where you're going, but that's not a fair comparison.  Politicians only ever speak when there is political gain to be made, so you still wouldn't get an honest response out of them.  And it doesn't take a dictator to know a dictator when they see one.

"Politicians only ever speak when there is political gain to be made, so you still wouldn't get an honest response out of them."

I hate to say it, but that's just a people thing.  I look on music (the actual act, not the industry) as a higher thing than most human pursuits (probably because I'm a wanker), but the fact is that music can be just as political as any human endeavour.  Even if musicians were only judged by their peers, 'political' decisions would be made.  Don't ask me how one would safeguard against such a possibility, but I wager it'd be impossible.

> Who wouldn't take a chef's word as to what the best restaurant in the city is?

Loads and loads of people.

> Politicians only ever speak when there is political gain to be made

Unless you're a politician, you can't possibly know that :)

> And it doesn't take a dictator to know a dictator when they see one.

Likewise, it doesn't take a good musician to know a good musician when they see one.

> but the fact is that music can be just as political as any human endeavour.

Indeed

> Even if musicians were only judged by their peers, 'political' decisions would be made.

Indeed.

RRHOF..........to be a couple of feet away from a Red Special, Deaky bass, Freddie's orange and white diamond leotard, Brian's Zandra Rhode's outfit, a Roger shirt...........was amazing for the HOF.  Then again, they had a crinkled 45 sleeve of 'Radio GaGa'...................talk about cheap.

Yes, Rush and Chicago deserve to be in (same with The Moody Blues).  Chicago had seven straight #1 LPs in the USA, and in many ways changed the face of rock (pop/jazz).  J.Geils epitomized party rock, but did not make it this year.  Seems as if it is only a write in popularity contest, and if Jan Werner had a favorable response as to who was/was not good to party with, that's who made it in (unless totally overwhelmed by popularity).

I am surprised  that The Blues Brothers are not in, or have the biggest display in Cleveland, .....

Moving on.......I was bored to death years ago, and figured that the most influential group/solo artist for Queen....was Alice Cooper.

Examples pre 1971

Don't Blow Your Mind.........  Why Don't You Love Me->She Blows Hot & Cold, Don't Try So Hard, Don't Stop Me Now,  Why Don't We Try Again, Love Me Like There's No Tomorrow

Titanic Overture->Overture Piccante
Living->Living On My Own
Levity Ball->Dreamer's Ball

There's later stuff, such as

'No More Mr. Nice Guy->Mr. Bad Guy
Easy Action, I'm Going Home->Action This Day, Leaving Home Ain't Easy
 It's Hot Tonight->Hot Space, Tonight
Under My Wheels-> Under Pressure
 You Drive Me Nervous->Driven By You
Be My Lover->Your Kind Of Lover
Dead Babies->Dead On Time, My Baby Does Me
Killer->Killer Queen

The reverse can be used as well.....
DragonTown<-Dragon Attack
We're All Crazy, Cold Ethyl<-Stone Cold Crazy