Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame

[GLooDrord]

Generally, I would say that what Burt does does not fall into the category. You could make a case that he wrote *some* tunes that were turned into rock records by other artists (like Love)... but a couple tunes in a genre isn't too right.

I don't think I could make a case for Dionne either, but (obvious to me) I love them both. Cheeks, I mean.

The only reason they vote on the hall anymore is for PR'ing the actual facility. Without the capitalistic aspect, most of the rock artists worthy were inducted first couple of years.

Since the Rock N Roll era is over, it detracts authenticity to add more artists. Example: Baseball, Football, Hide & Seek, Yatzee (eh)... they go on and with wonderous new personalities. However, Tennis has been finished for years and only Little Richard has a legit backhand.

Won't lobby for Dizzy Gillespie either. How does it not cheapen the honor by handing it out so easily and frivolously? He might qualify for Early Influence under the 'non-performer' category for Lifetime Achievement. Like building a whole new wing for just one guy? Slippery slope. What's next? Man-Dog? Father-Daughter? (Iggy & John perfectly covering those).

So, yes, my vote is NO.

[BachtoBacharach]

Since when could "Rock and Roll" be defined so purely? Aretha is certainly not a "Rock and Roll" performer by the pure standards some seem to endorse. Nor is Dusty Springfield, Diana Ross, the Mamas and the Papas, and most of the others inducted. The Mamas and Papas defined a pure pop sound, and would be excluded by such a rigid definition. Bacharach was not defined as a Rock and Roll composer, yet Dionne Warwick was, in her early career, called a Rhythm and Blues singer and was indentified in the press as a Rock and Roll singer and a Soul Singer...seems the definition has gotten tighter in the past 15 years...as an oldtimer, the standards weren't so clearly defined in the 50s and 60s as they are now. And doesn't the fact that so many diverse artists already in the RRHOF render the point moot? Great to discuss but irrelevant.

[An Enormous BB Fan]

BachtoBacharach, you stated that brilliantly and you are 100% correct.

[BachtoBacharach]

Thanks Enormous. Rock and Roll in the 50s and 60s was a combination of many things...and a 180 from the "pop" music of Theresa Brewer, The McGuire Sisters, Frank Sinatra, Johnny Ray, Perry Como etc. There is no "pure" rock and roll music! It was and always will be a mash-up of many styles and can't by it nature be defined narrowly and neither can the artists. Warwick was definitely not a "pop" singer nor was Bacharach a "pop" composer. "Walk on By" is probably one of the greatest Rock and Roll recordings ever and makes usually every critics list. Rock and Roll is what it is and you know when you are listening to it...like that old definition of pornography...you can't define what it is but you know it when you see it. The Beatles were a "pop" band compared to the Rolling Stones if you go by such rigid definitions that some believe...it ain't the "Rock Hall of Fame" and if it were then about 90 percent of the folks in would be out if it were a truly "Rock" organization; it's the Roll in Rock and Roll that makes it what it is...the "Rock Purists" came to the fore in the 70s...in the 60s they hardly existed. Warwick, singing those Bacharach/David penned hits WAS an influential and consistent hitmaker on Rock and Roll radio unlike folks like Dean Martin who broke through with a couple of "rock and roll" influenced hits but could never be considered a Rock and Roll singer...he's from another era. And Rock and Roll evolved from Country and Western and Rhythm and Blues among many other sounds. Warwick only became a "pop" singer by definition in later years by those "purists" who rewrite history and yes, in the 80s and on she was not a Rock and Roll singer. I have always heard if she had stopped her career in 1978 before she hooked up with Clive Davis she would be in. She was a hot commodity in the 1960s and early 1970s and the sound she, Bacharach and David created together absolutely could not be pigeonholed. Bossa Nova, Reggae, R & B, etc. are all in the mix. And their influence is cited by many "Rock and Roll luminaries" like Brian Wilson, Donald Fagan, Aretha Franklin, Dusty Springfield, Alice Cooper, and the list goes on and on. The RRHOF is strictly a commercial and "charitable" enterprise and from some accounts in the press, a pretty questionable one at that and lends no credibility to any artist inducted or not, in my opinion. The fact that so many are excluded who are truly more influential than many inducted illustrates that point better than anyone could explain and Jann Wenner, et al will never explain...the RRHOF is pretty much irrelevant; they certainly don't define what Rock and Roll was and is and who is or isn't a rock and roller although I believe they would like for everyone to believe that they are the final authority on the subject.

[An Enormous BB Fan]

I have to just say "EXCELLENT"! (again).

[Hank]

I firmly believe any effort to categorize pop music beyond that category: "popular" - is fundamentally flawed and is ultimately "anti-music".

My guess is that the US Music Industry's well publicized struggles of the last decade are rooted in their category by category approach as much as the digital revolution.

[BachtoBacharach]

This was just announced today...interesting. The RRHOF has never lived up to the hype and the pretensiousness of its founder, board and judges is just staggering and as time has gone on, I do believe it's irrelevance has become more and more obvious.


CLEVELAND — The year-old New York City annex to Cleveland’s Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum will shut down Jan. 3.

A news release issued Thursday by S2BN Entertainment, a partner in the venture, gave no reason for the closing.

Rock hall CEO Terry Stewart tells The Plain Dealer newspaper in Cleveland the decision was made by corporate partners who had backed the $10 million annex in downtown Manhattan.

Backers had hoped to attract up to a half-million visitors annually but have not said what attendance was.

Messages were left Friday for both S2BN Entertainment and rock hall officials.


gregory p. mango
The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Annex in SoHo.The collection displayed at the annex included Bruce Springsteen’s 1957 Chevy. The rock hall says some of the artifacts could become part of a traveling show.

[BachtoBacharach]

Hank, you are right...and Rock and Roll really defines an era more than a type of music...those from an earlier era (pre 1955) were popular recording artists and weren't labeled...if they were hot they were hot...regardless of the label. Rock and Roll was really a rebellion and a marketing ploy born in the 1950s rather than the genre it became. There were pre-1955 recordings with what is called a rock and roll beat and sound but the shrewed folks who marketed folks like Elvis, Little Richard, etc. capitalized on the idea of rebellion...'"this ain't yo' mama's music" but its roots go back so much further. And it was really born out of the blues when it all comes down to it and the blues like Rock and Roll and C & W are a truly American art form. I do agree totally that the US has always tried to categorize and label music as everything else, much as people seem to be categorized and this makes it so much easier for some of these misinformed folks who have come to the fore in politics to preach and teach hate by category or group. A reach maybe but haven't we Americans always tried to categorize everything....music included? Isn't is so much easier to dismiss something if it's labeled or categorized? I remember going into record stores in the 70s through now and finding everything classified by "sound" and you might walk into a store and find Dionne Warwick in the pop, easy listening, soul, R&B, female vocalists, Rock and Roll, etc...you get the idea. If it was on the charts in the 1960s it was easy to find in a record store...not so after that. It's a world of marketing demographics and labels from politics, to news, to religion, to food, to music...marketers exploit that human trait that "perception is reality". We are "living in a world made of Paper Mache" as Hal David so succinctly put it.