Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Rock N Roll Hall of Fame. **2018 Nominees**


DM72

Recommended Posts

I might have been ranting for mothing because little did I know that this was the first year The Spinners were nominated, so it's probably just a for gone conclusion that they get it.

And Cali, they did form in the 50's near the beginning of the rock n roll era, so they had to be somewhat influential. They started in the 50's and is still touring to this day. That has to count for something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might have been ranting for mothing because little did I know that this was the first year The Spinners were nominated, so it's probably just a for gone conclusion that they get it.

And Cali, they did form in the 50's near the beginning of the rock n roll era, so they had to be somewhat influential. They started in the 50's and is still touring to this day. That has to count for something.

So is Wayne Newton.

danke schoen, baby :movefast:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it seems that many here feel that "music I personally relate to as a suburban white guy" should be the only factor in getting into the HOF.

Well, I can say for me personally this is not the case. I'm a fan of most musical genres, despite what my sig would indicate. Yes, predominately, I do listen to Hard Rock and Metal. You can narrow it down to predominately music from the 70's and 80's. I do have a lot of music in my Ipod that would surprise most people though. Everything from Toby Keith, to Teddy Pendergrass, to 80's pop music. For me though, it is the "Rock and Roll Hall of Fame." What "Rock and Roll" is to everybody I'm sure is different, but for me "Rock and Roll" means exactly that. Not Madonna, and some of the other acts they put in. I completely agree with those who think Rush should be in. Rush were never a snobs rock band though, which is why they will never get in. I don't agree that Priest should not be in. First wave metal was pretty much Sabbath. Priest were part of the NWOBHM, the era that is pretty much the beginnings of what would become American Thrash Metal. Metallica, Megadeth, Anthrax etc. Priest didn't really break in America until British Steel in 1980. Sabbath had been around over 10 years by that point, so to lump Priest in with "first wave" IMO is incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not surprised by Diana Ross.

While she had a some solo hits, her legacy is with the Supremes. :2cents:

Edit: I'm not opposed to Diana getting in as a solo artist.

Yeah, but she was influential as a solo artist and many might say, "the origina diva." Before Whitney, Mary J, Beyonce and Britney Spears, there was Diana Ross.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

absolutely, 100%, Yes.

Without Elvis and then the Beatles, there is no "Rock and Roll"

Edit: Without Chuck Berry there is no "Rock and Roll"

I mean they are the beginnings of rock music.

So, outside of influence, what is it that makes them Rock and Roll but excludes Madonna? Madonna may not be in their league artistically, but her music is not really very far removed from what Elvis and the Beatles put out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

absolutely, 100%, Yes.

Without Elvis and then the Beatles, there is no "Rock and Roll"

Edit: Without Chuck Berry there is no "Rock and Roll"

I mean they are the beginnings of rock music.

I know this might be a shock to a lot of people, but music didn't begin with the Beatles. Rock n Roll "as we know it"(because its origins go back to at least the 40's), starts with Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Buddy Holly, Fats Domino, Jerry Lee Lewis, Elvis, The Platters and many more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this might be a shock to a lot of people, but music didn't begin with the Beatles. Rock n Roll "as we know it"(because its origins go back to at least the 40's), starts with Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Buddy Holly, Fats Domino, Jerry Lee Lewis, Elvis, The Platters and many more.

"The colored folks been singing it and playing it just like I'm doin' now for more years than I know....I got it from them." - Elvis, 1956.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this might be a shock to a lot of people, but music didn't begin with the Beatles. Rock n Roll "as we know it"(because its origins go back to at least the 40's), starts with Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Buddy Holly, Fats Domino, Jerry Lee Lewis, Elvis, The Platters and many more.

Absolutely, those artists were the very beginnings of rock. Everything in popular music that has come out since that time owes those artists a debt. The Beatles did alter the path though, and were the first "rock group" in the form which it came to be known. Without the Beatles, the rock groups of the 70's and 80's right up through today never exist as they are.

"The colored folks been singing it and playing it just like I'm doin' now for more years than I know....I got it from them." - Elvis, 1956.

Yup, yet some believe that Elvis was a racist. He always gave the credit where it was due. His white fans didn't always do that, but he did.

As far as the Madonna thing. I knew where you were going with that, and here's my issue. I would be more willing to accept her and "pop" acts similar to her, if the Hall of Fame did not blantantly snub artists who in my opinion are far more deserving, There are rock bands that should be in the hall, before a generally accepted "pop" artist is ever considered. Rush has already been mentioned. Judas Priest, Deep Purple, Kiss, etc. etc. Is Madonna MORE deserving of an induction than those bands? I think not. Look how long it took Black Sabbath to get in. A band that pretty much single-handedly created an entire musical genre. I know I probably sound like an Eddie Trunk clone, but our thoughts are pretty much the same on the subject.

Bottom line, you don't skip over bands like Deep Purple or Black Sabbath (prior to their induction) to put Madonna in the "Rock and Roll" Hall of Fame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, yet some believe that Elvis was a racist. He always gave the credit where it was due. His white fans didn't always do that, but he did.

I have no idea if Elvis was racist or not...the quote I gave doesn't prove anything one way or another. But I do know that Elvis never tried to make the proclamation that he came up with his music and songs all on his own. As you said, he had zero problem giving credit where credit was due...and it always irritated me when I'd see younger black Americans claiming otherwise.

As far as the Madonna thing. I knew where you were going with that, and here's my issue. I would be more willing to accept her and "pop" acts similar to her, if the Hall of Fame did not blantantly snub artists who in my opinion are far more deserving, There are rock bands that should be in the hall, before a generally accepted "pop" artist is ever considered. Rush has already been mentioned. Judas Priest, Deep Purple, Kiss, etc. etc. Is Madonna MORE deserving of an induction than those bands?...

Regardless of comparative talent levels, there is absolutely no denying that Madonna was by far one of the most influential female artists in Rock and Roll history. And I mean it's not even close. And she's more influential than Judas Priest, Deep Purple, Rush and Kiss, easily.

But forget the HOF for now...I still can't understand why Madonna shoudn't be considered "rock and roll". What about Prince? Should he be considered "rock and roll"? Why or why not?

Bottom line, you don't skip over bands like Deep Purple or Black Sabbath (prior to their induction) to put Madonna in the "Rock and Roll" Hall of Fame.

Just for the record, Black Sabbath was not skipped over to put Madonna in the HOF...they were inducted 2 years before Madonna made it in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of comparative talent levels, there is absolutely no denying that Madonna was by far one of the most influential female artists in Rock and Roll history. And I mean it's not even close. And she's more influential than Judas Priest, Deep Purple, Rush and Kiss, easily.

What About Prince? Should he be considered "rock and roll"?

People like to say Madonna was so influential, maybe she was, but before Madonna, there was Cher. I know acts like Britney Spears probably didn't even know who Cher was when they first hit the scene, but getting on stage, half dressed, pretty much started with Cher.

As for Prince. A lot of his music had a "rock" sound. The end guitar riff of "Lets Go Crazy" is a prime example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People like to say Madonna was so influential, maybe she was, but before Madonna, there was Cher. I know acts like Britney Spears probably didn't even know who Cher was when they first hit the scene, but getting on stage, half dressed, pretty much started with Cher.

Cher and Madonna are two completely different artist. The only things that they have in common are being solo acts and being female..and both going by one name lol :)... Madonna has more in common with Deborah Harry than Cher.

There really was no 70s version of Madonna, nor a 60s version. The closest you can get is naming some solo female performers who really didn't reside in the same musical and performance realms.

As for Prince. A lot of his music had a "rock" sound. The end guitar riff of "Lets Go Crazy" is a prime example.

Some of Madonna's music had a "rock" sound as well...and most of Prince's music had a rock and roll sound, not a rock sound. Even the mostly funk numbers had their foundation in rock and roll...which is one of the many reasons he became as popular as he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of comparative talent levels, there is absolutely no denying that Madonna was by far one of the most influential female artists in Rock and Roll history. And I mean it's not even close. And she's more influential than Judas Priest, Deep Purple, Rush and Kiss, easily.

But forget the HOF for now...I still can't understand why Madonna shoudn't be considered "rock and roll". What about Prince? Should he be considered "rock and roll"? Why or why not?

Just for the record, Black Sabbath was not skipped over to put Madonna in the HOF...they were inducted 2 years before Madonna made it in.

If the Hall of Fame was called The "Popular Music" Hall of Fame, you might have a case about Madonna being more influential than those other bands. Do you consider "Pop" music and "Rock and Roll" to be one in the same? For me "Rock and Roll" has always had a defining sound...it's hard to describe exactly what that is...but you know it when you hear it. For me an intense, predominantly electric guitar driven sound was "Rock and Roll." Starting with Chuck Berry and many of the 50's artists. Jerry Lee Lewis and Little Richard count, because they played the piano in that manner. So for me, Madonna doesn't fit the bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

While I'm thrilled to finally see Rush start to get their due, I wouldn't have lost sleep if they never got in. Not because they arent deserving, but because it pains me to see them grouped in with some of those jokes that are in there. This year increases the RRHOF's credibility, but they still have a long way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...