All I ever hear these days is whining about Madonna and Run-D.M.C. getting inducted. "Oh no," people complain, "the hall of fame has rejected its rock and roll roots!" Well, the way I see it, there are currently 164 artists inducted (It’s the way I see it because I might have miscounted, but it’s around there.) Out of those they have inducted 58 that cannot be considered rock, being these 58:
James Brown
Ray Charles
Sam Cooke
Fats Domino
Aretha Franklin
Marvin Gaye
B.B. King
Clyde McPhatter
Smokey Robinson
Big Joe Turner
Muddy Waters
Jackie Wilson
The Drifters
The Supremes
Dion
Otis Redding
The Temptations
Stevie Wonder
Hank Ballard
The Four Tops
The Platters
LaVern Baker
John Lee Hooker
The Impressions
Wilson Pickett
Jimmy Reed
Ike & Tina Turner
Bobby "Blue" Bland
Booker T and the M.G.s
Johnny Cash
The Isley Brothers
Sam & Dave
Ruth Brown
Etta James
Sly and the Family Stone
Bob Marley
Al Green
Martha and the Vandellas
Gladys Knight and the Pips
Little Willie John
The Shirelles
The Jackson 5
Parliament-Funkadelic
Curtis Mayfield
The Staple Singers
Earth, Wind and Fire
The Moonglows
Solomon Burke
The Flamingos
Isaac Hayes
The Dells
The O’Jays
Percy Sledge
Miles Davis
Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five
Little Anthony and the Imperials
Run-D.M.C.
Bobby Womack
That means that over a third of the members are not rock musicians. Furthermore, of the original ten members inducted in ‘86, four (the first four on the list) are not rock musicians. The museum should just change its name to the pop music hall of fame and get it over with.
Thoughts?
I don’t quite understand, guitar god. You say anything that isn’t rock is a subgenre of rock, which I would take to mean that blues, folk, rap, yada yada yada are all subgenres of rock. But then you say that rock is a subgenre of other genres. I don’t understand.
I think Jay’s right, it all comes down to semantics. I think the root of the problem is that the Hall of Fame (I assume you mean the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame) hasn’t given a clear definition on what they consider to be "rock and roll". Even so, I don’t think the Foundation ever actually specifies that the inductee’s work has to be considered rock, only that they have had an impact:
"One of the Foundation’s many functions is to recognize the contributions of those who have had a significant impact on the evolution, development and perpetuation of rock and roll by inducting them into the Hall of Fame."
Yes they could change the name, but it has such a nice ring to it as is.
April 15th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
the rock hall isnt just like for rock
its like a all types of music hof
anything that aint rock is actually a subgenre of rock
like rock is a subgenre of blues and jazz
References :
April 15th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
I think it’s no use getting all upset over a case of semantics.
References :
April 15th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
I think Jay’s right, it all comes down to semantics. I think the root of the problem is that the Hall of Fame (I assume you mean the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame) hasn’t given a clear definition on what they consider to be "rock and roll". Even so, I don’t think the Foundation ever actually specifies that the inductee’s work has to be considered rock, only that they have had an impact:
"One of the Foundation’s many functions is to recognize the contributions of those who have had a significant impact on the evolution, development and perpetuation of rock and roll by inducting them into the Hall of Fame."
Yes they could change the name, but it has such a nice ring to it as is.
References :
http://www.rockhall.com/inductees/induction-process/
April 15th, 2010 at 4:13 pm
Well, I think the music in Hard Rock Cafe deserve the same question. It’s funny, but the point for me is that all this artists make us dance or feels like "rock & roll"
. I mean they all are really great musicians.
References :
April 15th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
I completely know what you mean. I think some people just look for things to the minimal degree to complain about these days. It’s as though they just enjoy hearing themselves speak. Many of the musicians that you listed I wouldn’t say have all the way influenced rock and roll, but have influenced rock and roll musicians. I don’t want to come off as rude, but I don’t see why they care. Those people have actually done something to impact music. Regardless if it is great or not, they were still inducted, there’s a reason behind why they are in the Hall of Fame, and I think those who don’t respect that should learn to, until they achieve something not even as high, but maybe to a close ranking of any of the people you listed above. Although, I know all too well that’s in fact too much to ask of some. It’s not like anyone is forcing them to listen to those musicians. It’s just a list of artists who have achieved something and are gaining recognition for their work. I don’t think the museum should change their name just to pacify these people, because they’ll still look for faults. They’ll start to complain about "classic" rock radio stations playing Stevie Wonder, Sly & the Family Stone, or Johnny Cash. I usually just group every band or artist I like and put them into the category of rock, so that may be why I’m opposed to that sort of thinking.
References :