The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Sucks Just a Little Bit Less This Year
by admin on Dec.22, 2009, under Opinion
Every year around this time, rock music fans the world over collectively cringe when the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame announces its newest crop of inductees. Eyes roll, and complaints and arguments erupt online from every direction as fans passionately plead the cases of their favorite bands that have been passed over again this year.
They are right to complain, since the nomination and selection process is closed to the public; as a result, the Hall of Fame roster slants away from a number of eligible bands with tremendous popular support and heavily toward critical favorites that didn’t necessarily enjoy any real marketplace success (The Ramones, anyone?). Thus in years past we’ve been forced to endure the ascension of acts that critics championed, but most fans don’t actually like - for example The Velvet Underground, Leonard Cohen, Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five, and The Clash - while eligible bands that actually succeeded like Yes, Rush, Jethro Tull, Journey, Foreigner, Alice Cooper and Heart (to name but a small handful) have never even been nominated.
The crop of inductees for 2010 are a diverse bunch to say the least, encompassing a wide range of styles and eras. At least they’ve been chosen from a somewhat broader palette this year. Like a lot of rock music fans, I am terribly disappointed that KISS - incredibly, nominated for the first time - didn’t make the cut. Here are my thoughts on the bands that did:
Genesis: This is one induction that I can get behind one hundred percent. Not a critical favorite, but who cares? This isn’t the Rock and Roll Hall of Critical Acceptance, it’s the Hall of Fame, and Genesis has had a diverse career spanning four decades and touching on a number of genres. It’s about time progressive rock stopped getting shafted by the Hall of Fame, and early Genesis albums like Selling England By The Pound and The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway are essential listening for every prog rock fan. Later on the band became a formidable commercial hit maker, and it also spun off two solo superstars in Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins. Like a lot of other prog fans, I’ve never quite gotten over Invisible Touch or We Can’t Dance, but Genesis undoubtedly still belongs in the Hall of Fame.
The Hollies: I’m not so sure about this one. The Hollies’ music was well-written, well-sung, and well-played, and the group had a considerable amount of commercial success, too (although substantially less than, say, KISS), but in the end this band seems rather unremarkable to me. On the other hand The Hollies launched Graham Nash, who is deserving of every accolade he could ever get, so I can’t say too much in the negative. I will say that I rarely hear any musicians cite The Hollies as a primary influence. Is this band important enough, either critically or commercially, to deserve this honor? That’s too close to call for me.
Iggy and the Stooges: I know it’s perceived as “hip” (whatever that’s supposed to mean) to like Iggy and the Stooges, and I also know that virtually every other rock journalist on the planet supports this induction, but for me it’s just another glaring example of how a critical favorite can get inducted into the Hall of Fame despite a lack of popular support. This is a band that turned out a few not-terribly-successful albums quite a long time ago, punctuated by decades of inactivity and a spotty reunion. I should probably point out that the average rock fan likely can’t name even one song by this group. If the general public was allowed to have a say in the nomination and selection process, does anyone really believe Iggy and the Stooges would be going in instead of KISS? C’mon, get serious. I’m sorry, but this induction is a huge stretch for me.
Abba: Nobody can deny the overwhelming popular appeal of Abba. This is a band that consistently places at the top of polls of bands that fans would pay to see reunite, whose music is ubiquitous in pop culture and has even launched a successful Broadway show and hit movie. And although it’s not at all my personal taste, it’s even pretty good stuff for what it is. That said, I wouldn’t have any problem with including Abba in the Pop Hall of Fame, but I think the question has to be asked: Is Abba even rock and roll?
Jimmy Cliff: Undoubtedly a deserving artist from a purely critical perspective, and in this case his music even reached a wide audience, but here again I have to ask: Is Jimmy Cliff rock and roll?
So there we have it, our Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Class of 2010, whether we like it or not. It doesn’t matter. It never has. Unless you happen to be an industry insider and a part of the selection committee, your opinion has no value in the process. Even though we, the fans, are the reason this whole exercise exists - it is after all our money, in the form of our purchasing decisions, that provides the economic base for the entire industry that employs all of these people - the best that you and I can hope for again this year is to sit home and watch the proceedings on television. I think maybe this year I’ll watch Genesis get their award, and maybe the Hollies, then skip the rest and go play my KISS records really loud instead.
Sterling Whitaker, Perpetually Disappointed Rock Fan
December 2009
6 comments to “The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Sucks Just a Little Bit Less This Year”
Leave a Reply
-
Hi! Welcome to We Will Rock You!
Thanks for dropping by! Feel free to join the discussion by leaving comments, and stay updated by subscribing to the RSS feed. See ya around!
Subscribe Here
December 22nd, 2009 on 7:43 pm
so, let me see if i understand your thinking… popularity is more important than what the voters deem to be “artistic merit”? wow, if that’s the case, the hall of fame should be filled with nothing but chart topping popstars. what an utter tradgedy that would be.
p.s. the best induction (and refusal to accept/take part in said induction) was that of sex pistols. john lydon/johnny rotten said it perfectly in his letter to the hall of fame.
December 22nd, 2009 on 10:00 pm
The NASH-era Hollies definitely deserve recognition, and Graham Nash is happy for Allan Clarke. But without him there’s always been something missing from the group’s sound, that wonderful keen edge that no one else can provide. Poor Sylvester indeed.
December 23rd, 2009 on 8:45 am
Brian:
I’m not arguing that merit is not important. “Merit” is relative anyway because people value different things, and that’s their right. If you like Abba, you ought to listen to Abba and not let anyone tell you otherwise. Same with the Sex Pistols. What I’m saying is that the voting process is inherently flawed because it leaves no voice at all for real people - people who are not in the business and have no agenda other than what they enjoy - to have a say. How can you call that a Hall of Fame? If you were using it as a historical reference a hundred years from now, it would provide a completely incorrect alternate version of what was important in popular culture during the latter half of the 20th century and the first decade of this one. It’s just an extension of the tastes of a handful of critics and other insiders who are trying to re-write history in such a way that bands they liked will seem to have played a larger role than they actually did. The Hall of Fame ought to at least let ordinary people have a democratic voice in the nominations.
December 23rd, 2009 on 3:56 pm
bah, ALL ceremonies like this (including emmys, oscars, grammys, etc) are totally without merit. unless EVERYONE on the planet votes, the whole thing is a fraud, in my opinion. besides, sooooo many people/artists are left out and/or completely ignored altogether that the whole process is reduced to nothing more than a show of self-congratulations. it says far more about the industies themselves than it does of the artists. sorry to be all negative and pessimistic, but that’s just how i see it.
April 11th, 2010 on 1:29 pm
Seriously?! The Stooges are one of the hardest rocking, most influential bands, and you want to talk about the bullshit make-up wearing KISS? You have no fucking clue. Record sales have little to do with how good a band is. Kiss fucking sucks, go fuck yourself!
April 11th, 2010 on 8:02 pm
Joe:
Is that the way you address people in real life? Or are you only that brave given the relative anonymity of the Internet? Wow, what a big man you are . . . as long as you don’t have to back it up in real life. You should really re-think that kind of extreme rudeness, Joe . . . if that’s even your real name. What purpose do you suppose that serves?
Again, you are welcome to your OPINION, but it doesn’t change the FACT that KISS has outsold The Stooges probably a hundred times over. It also doesn’t change the fact that the average person walking down the street couldn’t name even ONE Stooges song. “Influential” is a comparative term anyway.
Have a nice day, Joe.