2021 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Nominees POLL

Baseball is less subjective because you have stats. In rock the only objective criterion is popularity, everything else is taste. So naturally the fame component looms larger in the rock HOF.

I wouldn't file every other criteria under taste though, that feels too generalized and broad. Like I don't think it's just a matter of personal taste that should get someone like the NY Dolls in. They're important the way the Ramones are important, not for their meager sales but for breaking new ground - laying the foundation for not just other bands but whole new genres and movements that would have a bigger place in the culture.

Regardless, I know someone who made a pretty good argument about how the HOF should be broadly inclusive, that it needs to be a complete picture of the culture, addressing both massively popular acts and historical/aesthetically important ones in equal measure.

I should add, I have doubts about that argument, but placing myself 100 years from now, I do see the value of it, even with music I don't like at all. Like if you're going to the HOF and want to learn the history of rock music in the 20th century, it makes little sense to show innovative music without a hint of what those innovations were supposedly reacting or responding to.

In rock the only objective criterion is popularity, everything else is taste.

I'd have to go back and check, but I think Homer Simpson scientifically and irrefutably proved that rock achieved perfection in 1974.

anybody's blood pressure going over 130/80 based on RRHOF nominees/inductees should probably hit the bong

Like if you're going to the HOF and want to learn the history of rock music in the 20th century, it makes little sense to show innovative music without a hint of what those innovations were supposedly reacting or responding to.

Extending this line of thinking, you could a get an even truer picture of the culture if you also induct AOR bands with one mid-ranking radio track (e.g. the Quireboys), bands who failed to get their demo signed, high school Battle of the Bands contestants, etc., to get a sense of where the innovators and reactors were coming from, what they were rising above, and what their ground-level influence looked like.

My karaoke version of "Silent Lucidity" was robbed.

xp tbh that sounds like a much cooler & more interesting museum than the RRHOF!

The Rock Hall of Obscurity

xp It does make sense to have that documented in the museum or at least preserved in their archives while you still can easily and thoroughly.

I was watching Footlight Parade the other day and my first reaction was "holy shit, they used to put on fully-produced mini-shows like that at movie palaces?" If it was a big part of movie going culture from that era, it's probably an obscure fact now with very limited documentation.

there should be a Rock and Roll Hall of Shit

That could be a new wing to the HOF - door opens up to an outdoor field of manure.

And KISS.

In rock the only objective criterion is popularity, everything else is taste.

There are plenty of equally or more objective criteria: years active, number of albums, number of band members, average tempo of songs in the catalogue, frequency of plagal cadences, number of "l"s in the band name, ...

guys I saw Ed Sheeran won a grammy but he's musically terribly how is this possible

frequency of plagal cadences

The Who and the Rolling Stones are already in there.

world without end

Something that continues to puzzle me: for all the complaints that x, y, or z "isn't rock and roll"--be it Carly Simon or whoever--I've never once come across anyone directing that at HOF member Leonard Cohen.

I'm not saying Carly Simon should be in--she shouldn't--but I don't see how she is any more or less rock and roll than Leonard Cohen. Ditto for other many other artists who are subjected to that.

Cohen could party.

Carly partied non-stop, she just did it on yachts.

Voter Two in that NY Mag article actually had a great and articulate response to those fretting over what's rock and what's not:

[Fela Kuti is] hugely important. People like to talk, “Why are they nominating people like Fela Kuti and Dolly Parton? That’s not rock and roll.” To which I would say, “Shut up. You’re an idiot.” One of the great things about rock and roll as a construct is that it’s a really porous art form that absorbs the best of a lot of other art forms. The remit of rock and roll is constantly expanding and evolving. The influence that Fela’s work has had in the genre is something that wouldn’t have been particularly well understood in, say, 1975. Maybe around 1982, because at that point, David Byrne and Brian Eno, among others, had discovered those rhythms. Fela’s work seems canonical to me. I’m very glad to see him in the mix.

I agree with him, but I also get the sense that it will remain a polarizing issue, one that's more likely to have those who don't agree at all (see Voter One). If I had to come up with a compromise, I'd say create a new category, "Beyond Category" (the highest praise Duke Ellington bestowed on people or music he loved). It would fit as both a broad philosophical description and a narrow literal designation: acts that aren't typically associated with rock (or any popular music profoundly shaped by rock culture since their beginning such as dance/disco or hip-hop), but nevertheless they manage to transcend the boundaries placed on their work. Not only Dolly Parton but figures like Miles Davis and John Coltrane among many others.

Here’s a RRHOF voter and making the case that there should be more alt rock & indie bands in the hall (ALERT: Uproxx link). It’s not particularly great writing, but he discusses that NY Mag interview… and when you see all the passed-over “buzz bin” bands listed out like that, it does make ya think.

I absolutely agree. I have to check again, but except for R.E.M., there's shamefully NO indie or American underground acts from the '80s, specifically the bands that bridged post-punk to alternative music and laid out the path for that seismic shift in rock culture, even though none of their albums went gold, much less platinum. As mentioned in the Azerrad book referenced in the article, there was a great documentary series produced by the BBC (and broadcast on PBS) on the history of rock & roll, but one of the very few significant faults with it was the way they omitted any discussion on indie and underground rock in the '80s - it was like punk disappeared or moved on to other things in the UK after failing to break through the charts in the U.S., and then suddenly Nirvana appeared out of a vacuum.

Most of the bands picked out by Azerrad should be in the HOF to complete the picture: Black Flag, Sonic Youth, Hüsker Dü, the Replacements, Minutemen, Pixies (who aren't in the book for some reason), Minor Threat/Fugazi, and probably Mission of Burma, Butthole Surfers, Big Black and Dinosaur Jr too though I can see support for those bands being weaker. (I'd vote for them.) I imagine they all must be visible in the museum in some way, but they deserve to be celebrated and exposed to more listeners who would be fans but haven't found them yet.

(To be fair, R.E.M. eventually sold plenty, but not the others.)

(And Minor Threat and Fugazi really should be two separate inductions)

Personally, I'd limit that to Sonic Youth, Husker Du, and the Replacements (think I said as much 12 years ago in the first thread I ever started on here). Putting in Big Black would be like putting in Gary Puckett & the Union Gap.

Black Flag, Minor Threat and Fugazi seem like essential inductees to me for reasons beyond music - specifically the labels their key members founded. You've got SST becoming more or less the center of American underground music of the '80s (despite its terrible business practices that would quickly snowball and alienate everyone on its roster), and then there's Dischord which has become a model of lasting DIY idealism.

I probably should've said "for reasons that go beyond their music as well."

13 years ago, plus three days.

The Bert Blyleven Poll

any popular music profoundly shaped by rock culture since their beginning such as dance/disco or hip-hop), but nevertheless they manage to transcend the boundaries placed on their work. Not only Dolly Parton but figures like Miles Davis and John Coltrane

Miles is associated with rock! He was inducted in 06.

First part of quote was

acts that aren't typically associated with rock (or

I would probably consider Carly Simon more rock than Leonard Cohen, if I were forced to make a call. Did anyone say Carly Simon isn't a rock artist? I just thought the criticism was that she isn't of enough historical significance.

Don't know if anyone here said it here, but it's the kind of thing I'll hear or read all the time.

I've even seen the charge levelled at Madonna and the Supremes (no, not here), which is obviously ridiculous. But never Leonard Cohen. I'd say the is/isn't rock and roll distinction is, in general, where the bias against females is most blatant, and why Dionne Warwick (and maybe even the Shangri-Las) isn't in, as she definitely should be.

Without Pixies there wouldn't be a Nirvana, all reasonable persons acknowledge this, yet one band is more famous, innit?

Replacements are also a causal factor quite beyond their own sales.

So we're back to basically advocating for the Velvet Underground again and gah this seems like... well-trodden rhetorical ground for ILM/X

it just makes me want to burn down the Hall and magically erase its existence from our collective memories, rather than try to reform it and make it make sense

Big Black doesn't belong in the Hall, but Steve Albini definitely does. Induct him for "Musical Excellence" like Jam & Lewis. Without him, '80s and especially '90s rock would sound very, very different. Plus, it'd probably piss him off, so we'd get a good Twitter thread out of it.

You put one Azerrad band in, then you have to put them all in. Pretty much all of them had good critical reviews and could be said to be influential to *insert 90s alt-rocker here*

There isn’t really one of them all who really stood out in terms of fame or sales from each other, not enough anyway. The only one who really did was REM, and we’re not really counting them (plus they’re already in)

so r we gonna just keep up this discussion in two sep threads

Part of critic Ann Powers take in a public Facebook post. Eh, I have never been a Pat Benatar fan

It's a great year for artists who don't tower above -- the critically underrated and overlooked, the once-questionable, the genuinely loved hard workers who add depth to the music industry's vast middle ground. Pat Benatar, Carly Simon, Duran Duran, Eurythmics: that's a populist playlist if I've ever heard one. Which is why the failure of voters to induct Dionne Warwick, a true genius of the middle, makes no sense to me. Lionel Richie, her spiritual nephew, got in; her omission is the most egregious. As for Eminem, another inevitability but Tribe deserved that spot. I'm very happy with Harry Belafonte, Elizabeth Cotten, Jam & Lewis and Sylvia Robinson getting acknowledged, too.

There's always an artist or three we don't like.

And an artist or three left out

So we're back to basically advocating for the Velvet Underground again

I mean, VU got in! (maybe that’s your point…)

Right, but once you have done so it unleashes the deluge of all the other "influencers who were not particularly famous" and that way lies madness

Because you get to a reductio thing where basically every musician ever should either be inducted, or none should.

Burn

It

Down

Re: Carly Simon, did anyone argue whether James Taylor was rock when he was inducted? tbh I figured she was nominated partly because of that - if you induct James Taylor, you have to at least nominate Carly Simon. I think Taylor has more worthy songs, but I'm not sure I would have inducted either.

I gave Benatar another try and played Best Shots but it was really tough getting through the whole thing. So much of it felt overwrought.

The Velvets didn't make it in their first year of eligibility, and an argument could be made that part of what got them in was recognizing Reed & Cale's careers, particularly since at that time the former's solo work didn't seem a lock for induction.

xxp personally I kind of prefer that. On some level that got me into exploring music. Like there's a LOT more than what I've heard on the radio, going back to my grandfather (and even great-grandfather's) childhood, and that sense of discovery even applied to famous musicians - I knew Louis Armstrong, but as a harmless celebrity, not a revolutionary musical genius. Something like Lionel Richie's solo career is like, "oh that guy" and nothing more.

Also, no room for DJs in the hall? Larry Levan, Frankie Knuckles, Jeff Mills, Sasha, Paul Oakenfold, Carl Cox, Tiesto, Sven Väth, Talla 2xlc?

Flash is in there

xp there's always been a strong bias against anything rooted in dance or electronic music. There's Madonna and they're kinder towards disco-era stuff: Abba, Donna Summer, the Bee Gees and Nile Rodgers (not even Chic and not even as a performer), and they finally rammed Kraftwerk in with the "musical excellence" consolation, but there's nothing else past them, not even global superstars New Order. With that in mind, I think it's going to be a long while before you see more DJ's, not unless they're part of a hip-hop group.

Also, no room for DJs in the hall? Larry Levan, Frankie Knuckles, Jeff Mills, Sasha, Paul Oakenfold, Carl Cox, Tiesto, Sven Väth, Talla 2xlc?

― Siegbran, Friday, May 6, 2022

they're not real musicians, man