Rolling Stone Magazine Hits a Sour Note With Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Nominees (Like Madonna) Monday , October 01, 2007
By Roger Friedman
ADVERTISEMENT
To anyone who's still reading or buying Rolling Stone: It's time to boycott Jann Wenner's flagship magazine.
I've never participated in a boycott - not of lettuce or grapes or anything else. But enough is enough.
After the announcement late Friday of the nominees' ballot for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, there's only thing to do: Hit publisher Wenner, who controls the Rock Hall, where it hurts.
If you love rock 'n' roll, stop buying Rolling Stone until the tremendous insults of the Hall of Fame are corrected.
Wenner's nominating committee consists largely of his current and former employees from Rolling Stone (Nathan Brackett, David Fricke, Jim Henke, Joe Levy, Brian Keizer, Toure, and Anthony DeCurtis). But they have little say over who really is inducted.
Last year, in a story reported by this column exclusively, Wenner threw out a vote in which the classic British invasion group Dave Clark Five was voted in and changed it for another round that favored rappers Grandmaster Flash.
As one insider from the Hall has maintained, "Once Ahmet Ertegun died, Jann felt like he could run wild." The legendary co-founder of Atlantic Records was considered the only person who could control Wenner. He died in 2006.
The Dave Clark Five incident has repercussions, however. I'm told that Wenner was made to meet Clark after I broke that story last March. The group now is guaranteed entry, although it's a bittersweet win. They are probably not, to paraphrase one of their hits, "Glad All Over."
But this year's choices are a complete affront to fans of the Rock and Roll Hall. And to show how much Wenner controls what's happening, the exclusive announcement was made on Rolling Stone's Web site.
If you're still reading or buying Rolling Stone, it's time to stop.
This year's ballot shows that the Hall has skipped over the seminal 1970s for the worthless '80s. The committee has chosen dance music over rock. They've all but ignored the pioneers who influenced the genre in favor of non sequiturs.
The choices: dance group Chic, hip-hop pioneer Afrika Bambaataa, mediocre Bruce Springsteen-wannabe John Mellencamp (a Wenner crony who's lost out on many tries), white rappers the Beastie Boys, disco queen Donna Summer and, of course, Madonna.
Among "older" names: the aforementioned DC5, instrumentalists the Ventures and Leonard Cohen.
Here's the idea: that these names should enter the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame before such historically important and influential acts as Iggy Pop and the Stooges, "fifth Beatle" Billy Preston or performer/ producer Todd Rundgren.
They aren't the only ones.
Major groups the Hall voters deem "not hip": The Moody Blues (simply for "Days of Future Passed") and Chicago (for its first two seminal albums). Hall & Oates, Yes, Genesis, J. Geils Band, Alice Cooper and KISS are also names often mentioned by critics.
Also left wanting: stars such as Carly Simon and Linda Ronstadt, who were mainstays of Rolling Stone in the 1970s, have been iced out. Carole King was inducted only as a writer with ex-husband Gerry Goffin. Her achievement as the creator of "Tapestry," for years the best-selling album of all time, has been ignored.
Neil Sedaka ("Calendar Girl," "Breaking Up Is Hard to Do") is not in the Hall of Fame. Neither is Neil Diamond ("I'm a Believer," "Sweet Caroline"). That's right. They only wrote half the hits that modern groups cover or sample. Go figure.
The late Laura Nyro, who also wrote a dozen or so hits, is absent, as is Leon Russell, whose songs "This Masquerade" and "A Song for You" are among the most covered by pop acts. He also was a member of Phil Spector's legendary band, as were other nonmembers Glen Campbell and Sonny Bono.
Then there are the R&B performers who remain in the cold, such as Tina Turner, Dionne Warwick, Motown legends Mary Wells, the Marvelettes and the Spinners, not to mention Ben E. King ("Stand by Me" and dozens of hits on Atlantic), Stax Records legends Carla and Rufus Thomas, Spector star Darlene Love, Joe Tex, Al Green and, of course, Chubby Checker, whom the Hall denies over and over again despite his invention of rock's greatest dance hit, "The Twist."
Neither John Fogerty, Lou Reed, Peter Gabriel, Ringo Starr, Tom Waits, Steve Winwood, Diana Ross, Steve Miller nor Sonny Burgess - the man behind Elvis Presley - is in the Hall of Fame.
OK, just so we're straight on why Rolling Stone must be boycotted. It wants the Beastie Boys before Randy Newman, The Hollies, Tom Jones or Mitch Ryder's "Devil in the Blue Dress."
Controversial Cat Stevens also stays in the cold despite his dozen or so hits and his influence on singer-songwriters of his era. And I haven't even raised the idea of Poco, Aaron Neville, the Turtles, Gram Parsons and hitmakers Three Dog Night, whose members made hits for dozens of new songwriters including Harry Nilsson, John Hiatt, Jimmy Cliff, Hoyt Axton, Paul Williams and Randy Newman.
The Hall has caused its own problems over the years. It no longer includes three categories that the Hall introduced, then eliminated: Non-Performers, Side Men and Early Influences. The nominating committee, with a couple of exceptions who are obviously ignored, is simply too young and uneducated in popular music history to select entries in those groupings.
It's a pathetic, ridiculous situation and it must be stopped.
Of the new crop, I don't have much to say that's positive. Madonna is a steamroller because of the cult of personality. She's not a rocker, she has a thin voice and she doesn't write all of her own material. But she's a force of nature.
There's no stopping Madonna when she wants something. Chances are good she won't bring Steve Bray, Patrick Leonard, William Orbit and all her writers and producers to the stage. They are Madonna.
Chic is a fun idea with great songs, but it was really producer-writer Nile Rodgers and his partner Bernard Summers who made it work as a dance group. Rodgers should be in as a hugely successful producer of music by David Bowie, Ross and others. Summers can be thanked. Chic, however, is not rock.
The rest are totally off base, given the above list. Summer was a disco act. For her to get in before Ronstadt is a joke. Mellencamp at least plays rock. But he's a minor note in the genre's history.
Afrika Bambaataa and the Beastie Boys: Are they kidding? Even the latter must be laughing. They had one big hit, "You've Got to Fight for Your Right to Party." The former, while I'm sure quite lovely, is a record-scratcher with a great name. Each of these belongs in a Rap Hall of Fame.
And it's not that I am against hip-hop or rap artists in the Hall of Fame. But Run-DMC is the obvious choice for an act in that genre that crossed into rock. Apart from its own music, Run-DMC's partnership with Aerosmith on "Walk This Way" brought hip-hop to a new level and standard. No one would argue with its inclusion.
Of the two senior acts aside from the DC5, the Ventures probably are a good idea. The Hall lacks instrumentalists. But Cohen should be in as a writer. His morose style never once crossed into rock, and he knows it.
Diamond, Sedaka and Simon have among them dozens more actual rock hits as writers and performers. Come on. And Cohen's songs have not had nearly the same impact on rock as those by Jimmy Webb. He's also been snubbed by Wenner's crew.
By the way: The Hall of Fame Foundation, which Wenner runs with toadie Joel Peresman, has nothing to do with the Rock and Rock Hall of Fame Museum in Cleveland.
"Jann treats the museum like a toy and has no respect for Terry Stewart," an insider says. Stewart runs the museum with no regard for Wenner's exclusions.
Last year, the Hall claimed to have given away only $158,968 of its $12 million war chest to needy musicians. It gave $56,236 to the museum to maintain its own archives. The museum must raise its own money.
Peresman is thought to get between $300,000 - what the previous director was paid - and $500,000.
New board members include wealthy businessmen Craig Hatkoff (co- founder of the Tribeca Film Festival) and Dirk Ziff (heir to a media fortune), nice guys who have no connection to the music business or rock 'n' roll at all. They're Wenner's friends. Famed rocker Jay-Z - ha ha - also has joined.
Former inductees to the Hall, by the way, must buy their own tickets to the annual Waldorf-Astoria dinner. Tickets cost $3,500. Few, if any, show up anymore for the big jam session at the end of the night.
These selections for 2008 are terrible, but they're just the beginning of what's going to be a weird ride, thanks to the new generation. To wit: Kanye West is scheduled to be honored soon by the Chicago branch of the Recording Academy.
This means that other artists will have to perform a tribute to him by performing his music. Only: He has no music. West samples existing records. So someone will have to sample a sample to praise him. It's sad.
So: I don't know anyone who buys or reads Rolling Stone, but someone must, since Wenner Media seems to make money. It can't all be Us Weekly.
Until real rock is served by the Hall of Fame, please don't buy Rolling Stone or click on any of the ads on its Web site. Then maybe Wenner will get the message that no one can take his Rock and Roll Hall of Fame seriously anymore.
On Oct 1, 2:38 pm, poisoned rose <captainvinega...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Afrika Bambaataa and the Beastie Boys: Are they kidding? Even the > > latter must be laughing. They had one big hit, "You've Got to Fight > > for Your Right to Party."
> Obviously has zero understanding of the Beasties' importance.
Yes, they're the fathers of that most horrible kind of heavy metal music with its hip hop/rap fusions that makes the biggest piles of garbage ever put to tape.
There are so many reasons to hate Jann Wenner, and so many reasons not to read Rolling Stone, that I can't help but interject how much I still appreciate some aspects of Rolling Stone Magazine after all these years. I find the political analysis in the magazine to be better than I get in other American magazines. The latest issue's article about the GOP's war politics, by Matt Taibbi, is a good example, though often there're often much better articles. Every issue also has a cartoon by David Rees, Get Your War On, which is quite brilliant. And there' usually good musical information. Where else would I have found out that the version of Dylan's I'm Not There on the movie soundtrack is from the master, which they found had been accidentally given to Neil Young's 20 years ago?
Don't get me wrong. I hate Rolling Stone as much as the next guy. But I still keep reading it, as I have ever since the first issue.
On Oct 1, 8:35 pm, really real <reallyr...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> There are so many reasons to hate Jann Wenner, and so many reasons not > to read Rolling Stone, that I can't help but interject how much I still > appreciate some aspects of Rolling Stone Magazine after all these years. > I find the political analysis in the magazine to be better than I get in > other American magazines. The latest issue's article about the GOP's war > politics, by Matt Taibbi, is a good example, though often there're often > much better articles. Every issue also has a cartoon by David Rees, Get > Your War On, which is quite brilliant. And there' usually good musical > information. Where else would I have found out that the version of > Dylan's I'm Not There on the movie soundtrack is from the master, which > they found had been accidentally given to Neil Young's 20 years ago?
> Don't get me wrong. I hate Rolling Stone as much as the next guy. But I > still keep reading it, as I have ever since the first issue.
I stopped my 10plus years of subscribing to RS in the mid-to-late 80s when it ceased to be relevant, and decided to go the "USA Today" route in the dumbing-down of America.
> I stopped my 10plus years of subscribing to RS in the mid-to-late 80s > when it ceased to be relevant, and decided to go the "USA Today" route > in the dumbing-down of America.
> I have never regretted my decision.
But how do you make it through the day without a sense of rage about what's going on?
On Oct 1, 9:56 pm, really real <reallyr...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > I stopped my 10plus years of subscribing to RS in the mid-to-late 80s > > when it ceased to be relevant, and decided to go the "USA Today" route > > in the dumbing-down of America.
> > I have never regretted my decision.
> But how do you make it through the day without a sense of rage about > what's going on?
marcus wrote: > I stopped my 10plus years of subscribing to RS in the mid-to-late 80s > when it ceased to be relevant, and decided to go the "USA Today" route > in the dumbing-down of America.
> I have never regretted my decision.
Yeah, I stopped in 1983 or so. I'll buy the occasional anniversary issue.
marcus wrote: > On Oct 1, 9:56 pm, really real <reallyr...@shaw.ca> wrote: >>> I stopped my 10plus years of subscribing to RS in the mid-to-late 80s >>> when it ceased to be relevant, and decided to go the "USA Today" route >>> in the dumbing-down of America. >>> I have never regretted my decision. >> But how do you make it through the day without a sense of rage about >> what's going on?
On Oct 1, 6:02 pm, poisoned rose <captainvinega...@aol.com> wrote:
> AC <mightymartia...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Afrika Bambaataa and the Beastie Boys: Are they kidding? Even the > > > > latter must be laughing. They had one big hit, "You've Got to Fight > > > > for Your Right to Party."
> > > Obviously has zero understanding of the Beasties' importance.
> > Yes, they're the fathers of that most horrible kind of heavy metal > > music with its hip hop/rap fusions that makes the biggest piles of > > garbage ever put to tape.
> Another level-headed view. They just keep on coming.
Ah yes, your viewpoint is valid, all others with a varying opinion are ignorant scum.
This article is a good example of what I was saying the other day. With most acts, there's no real reason why one should be inducted before the other.
> Neither John Fogerty, Lou Reed, Peter Gabriel, Ringo Starr, Tom Waits, > Steve Winwood, Diana Ross, Steve Miller nor Sonny Burgess - the man > behind Elvis Presley - is in the Hall of Fame.
Sonny Burgess is the man behind Elvis Presley? I could understand that claim for Scotty Moore or Sam Phillips, but Sonny Burgess? Burgess made some fine rockabilly records that didn't sell at all, but there's almost no connection between him and Elvis.
> OK, just so we're straight on why Rolling Stone must be boycotted. It > wants the Beastie Boys before Randy Newman, The Hollies, Tom Jones or > Mitch Ryder's "Devil in the Blue Dress."
And the reason why The Beastie Boys shouldn't be there, but Randy Newman and Tom Jones should is...? Mitch Ryder, unlike those three, is unquestionably rock and roll, but he's definitely a minor figure.
> Controversial Cat Stevens also stays in the cold despite his dozen or > so hits and his influence on singer-songwriters of his era.
What influence?
And I
> haven't even raised the idea of Poco, Aaron Neville, the Turtles, Gram > Parsons and hitmakers Three Dog Night, whose members made hits for > dozens of new songwriters including Harry Nilsson, John Hiatt, Jimmy > Cliff, Hoyt Axton, Paul Williams and Randy Newman.
Ok, I can see some of them eventually getting in, but Poco? The Turtles? Ok, they had some good records, but if "Happy Together" or "Devil With The Blue Dress On," is enough to get you in, so is "Bad Girls."
If Poco qualifies as rock and roll, so does Leonard Cohen, who has at least as strong a songwriting record as anyone in the above list and who was probably more influential than Cat Stevens.
.
> Chic is a fun idea with great songs, but it was really producer-writer > Nile Rodgers and his partner Bernard Summers who made it work as a > dance group. Rodgers should be in as a hugely successful producer of > music by David Bowie, Ross and others. Summers can be thanked. Chic, > however, is not rock.
As opposed to Cat Stevens?
> The rest are totally off base, given the above list. Summer was a > disco act. For her to get in before Ronstadt is a joke.
A case can be made for that, though I wouldn't feel too strongly about it.
> And it's not that I am against hip-hop or rap artists in the Hall of > Fame. But Run-DMC is the obvious choice for an act in that genre that > crossed into rock. Apart from its own music, Run-DMC's partnership > with Aerosmith on "Walk This Way" brought hip-hop to a new level and > standard. No one would argue with its inclusion.
The song made rap more visible, but "a new level and standard?" All it did was add guest stars and a familar chorus to what they'd done previously.
> Of the two senior acts aside from the DC5, the Ventures probably are a > good idea. The Hall lacks instrumentalists. But Cohen should be in as > a writer. His morose style never once crossed into rock, and he knows > it.
Poco is rock, but "Suzanne" isn't? I'm Your Man isn't a rock album?
> Diamond, Sedaka and Simon have among them dozens more actual rock hits > as writers and performers.
Those three are barely rock, and Simon is already in with Garfunkle.
Come on. And Cohen's songs have not had
> nearly the same impact on rock as those by Jimmy Webb.
That's not the most ignorant statement in this article, but it's close.
On Oct 5, 12:24 am, "BlackMonk" <BlackM...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> > Diamond, Sedaka and Simon have among them dozens more actual rock hits > > as writers and performers. > Those three are barely rock, and Simon is already in with Garfunkle.
Which all boils down to how you define "rock." Sedaka isn't modern standards, but I'd argue that Simon and Diamond have both bordered folk and rock long enough to be considered as part of the genre's history.
If Simon is in there with Garfunkel, then go take John Lennon and Paul McCartney out now. Same with Eric Clapton. You either go all with one entry only (and sub-entries for solo years) or you allow it for everyone.
On Oct 1, 5:38 pm, poisoned rose <captainvinega...@aol.com> wrote:
> > This year's ballot shows that the Hall has skipped over the seminal > > 1970s for the worthless '80s.
> Uh huh. Another level-headed view. For me, this article's > credibility is already shot.
The writer's specifically looking at female musicians when he says it -- and, quite frankly, he's right: Carole King's Tapestry is a seminal album in post-Elvis record charts. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame may be balancing themselves out on colour, but when it comes to women too many of the women are being passed over for others.
> Billy Preston? Get a grip.
Preston is closer to rock than most of this year's nominees. Granted, he'd be low on most people's lists, but he's still a lot closer to the genre than what we got.
> > Neil Sedaka ("Calendar Girl," "Breaking Up Is Hard to Do") is not in > > the Hall of Fame. Neither is Neil Diamond ("I'm a Believer," "Sweet > > Caroline"). That's right. They only wrote half the hits that modern > > groups cover or sample.
> Oh sure, that's true. <eyeroll>
Smash Mouth had a decent hit covering "I'm A Believer." Seriously.
I think you're missing the real point of the article, which is that the rules have been discarded in favour of putting in anyone that the committee feels would make a good show or a signpost of music. If the Hall went back to the original rules, then Diamond would be a shoo-in for songwriter, since his songs were covered by The Monkees, Simply Red ("Red Red Wine" folks), and more recently Smash Mouth, not to mention having Sweet Caroline sampled -- forget who did it, was really too drunk at the time.
They may not fit by today's standards, but the Hall is supposed to celebrate history in a way you can learn from it.
It's like action movies. Before Bruce Lee, an action movie meant a big gun fight or chase scene outside of the old west. (Diamonds Are Forever, Bullitt and Batman: The Movie are action movies of the sixties according to every contemporary publication.) Now, we don't consider them action movies because they don't involve huge body counts or fisticuffs. As a result, we invalidate the past through our own ignorance.
> > Then there are the R&B performers who remain in the cold, such as Tina > > Turner > Inducted with Ike.
Tina belongs in there separately as well. If anything, her refusal to lay down and die by returning to music as a solo artist is an example that should be taught. Plus, she's a successful African American woman in a generation of musicians dominated by white British men -- good for the balance!
> > Neither John Fogerty > Inducted with CCR.
Fogerty's a stretch for his solo material, I'll grant you that. But he IS more rock than this year's nominees.
> > Lou Reed > Inducted with VU
Reed deserves to be there separately. His Velvet Underground albums are legendary, but as a solo musician he's had more hits, he's produced records, and he continues to be an influence to some new musicians.
> > Ringo Starr > Inducted with Beetles
John, Paul and George are there as solo artists. Ringo deserves to be there as well, just out of fairness to the guy who -- as Photograph demonstrates -- continued to make good music. Plus, his All Starr bands and latest records attracted later musicians like Tom Petty, Richard Marx and Alanis Morrissette to the studio/stage, indicating that there's always been a love of Ringo.
> > Diana Ross > Inducted with Supremes
Diana Ross was one of the few acts to find continued success once Motown left Detroit. Her singular influence on Michael Jackson is enough to get her recognized as making an impact. And she's more rock than Donna Summer (much as I love Donna's music, that's just how it is).
> Tom Jones? Puhleeze.
If you're gonna go by pop hits, Tom Jones is closer to rock than Madonna.
> Obviously has zero understanding of the Beasties' importance.
The Beasties AREN'T important to rock and roll. They are important to rap music, but that -- and Grandmaster Flash -- raises the serious question of where the line is drawn between rap and rock. The Beasties were hardcore wannabes who's only major success was "You've Gotta Fight"; other acts appeared quickly and moved rap along a much different path than the Beasties. Honestly, I don't see how you can see the Beasties were much of an impact on NWA, Public Enemy and Bodycount.
> I don't know why Fox News even attempts to include music criticism. > Every time I get pointed at something from that site, it's a joke. > Now that I think of it, it's usually written by Roger Friedman too. > Maybe they just need a better critic.
Critics are definable by what they know and you don't (otherwise, we could all be critics). Friedman's examples may be vary in quality, but his points are still worth noting. Bands that earn the right to make it are being passed over, rules are being ignored, and there are a lot of bands out there that are closer to rock than this year's nominees.
The fact that critics ROUTINELY point out the absence of Genesis, Yes, Kiss and ELO (for example) indicates that there is a huge problem preceived with the Hall. Madonna and Chic getting nominated over them just reinforces that belief.
On Oct 5, 12:24 am, "BlackMonk" <BlackM...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> This article is a good example of what I was saying the other day. With most > acts, there's no real reason why one should be inducted before the other.
Totally agree.
> Sonny Burgess is the man behind Elvis Presley? I could understand that claim > for Scotty Moore or Sam Phillips, but Sonny Burgess? Burgess made some fine > rockabilly records that didn't sell at all, but there's almost no connection > between him and Elvis.
Unless he's thinking about the founders category. Robert Johnson didn't sell many records either and is in there, so why not put a rockabilly founder in too? Plus, if you look at some of his nominations [Fogerty, for example] there's a kind of touch on rockabilly with CCR and that's it.
> And the reason why The Beastie Boys shouldn't be there, but Randy Newman and > Tom Jones should is...?
The Beasties never aspired to be rock, just hardcore -- then they found rap. (This is a point made by their first producer in the film American Hardcore.)
Randy Newman should be as a songwriter, which is a category's absence the writer laments. Newman wrote some fine pieces -- notably "Leave Your Hat On" -- and, having seen him just this past summer I can tell you that the wit and skill has never disappeared. His recent single, "A Few Words In Defense Of Our Country" should be picked up by the Republicans and played all through Washington: dislike Bush all you want, he's no Emperor Nero or Vlad the Impaler.
I think the idea with Jones, as I posted earlier, is that if you're gonna induct Madonna, Jones is closer to rock than her.
> > Controversial Cat Stevens also stays in the cold despite his dozen or > > so hits and his influence on singer-songwriters of his era.
> What influence?
That soft melodic sound of Cat Stevens, James Taylor and Harry Chapin which everyone agrees is the softest sound of the seventies and paved the way for "easy listening." "Cat's In The Cradle" and "The First Cut Is The Deepest" are still strong pieces no matter how you cut it. (Personally, I say put him in as songwriter.)
> Ok, I can see some of them eventually getting in, but Poco? The Turtles? Ok, > they had some good records, but if "Happy Together" or "Devil With The Blue > Dress On," is enough to get you in, so is "Bad Girls."
Agreed. However, "Bad Girls" shouldn't be a rush to put in over Mitch Ryder and the Turtles, since both bands had a number of records that are 'rock.' For that matter, how about the Zombies with "Time Of The Season" and "She's Not There"?
> If Poco qualifies as rock and roll, so does Leonard Cohen, who has at least > as strong a songwriting record as anyone in the above list and who was > probably more influential than Cat Stevens.
Agreed. Leonard is a fine choice for the Hall, but he shouldn't be the only choice in the nominees that critics can point to and say 'yes'.
> The song made rap more visible, but "a new level and standard?" All it did > was add guest stars and a familar chorus to what they'd done previously.
"Walk This Way" put a level of quality to rap in the mainstream against which later rap records would be compared. Will Smith's "Parents Just Don't Understand," for example, fits next to it but "Copkiller," by Ice-T, or "Fuck The Police" by NWA don't. As a result, I'd say that a case -- weak case, but a case nevertheless -- can be made that "Walk This Way" was the single that split rap into acceptable/subversive, and then the acceptable got pushed so far away from rap that it merges with disco's remnants to become the basis of hip hop.
All I know is, middle class kids bought "Walk This Way" and didn't get lip from their parents buying it. They did get lip for buying "Fuck The Police."
poisoned rose wrote: > When Ringo gets in, the biggest reason will be simply because it > seems so "mean" to induct the other three and leave him out. It's > mercy sex.
After some of the remarks he's made, he might have a tough time.
O'Leary III <hockeyst...@frippy.net> wrote: > poisoned rose wrote:
>> When Ringo gets in, the biggest reason will be simply because it >> seems so "mean" to induct the other three and leave him out. It's >> mercy sex.
> After some of the remarks he's made, he might have a tough time.
I would think the influence that Ringo's drumming played on popular music afterwards ought to get him in, even if that drumming largely took place with the Beatles. Let's face it, none of them had artistically stellar solo careers. George had two REALLY good albums, Paul had two or three, John you have to pick and choose from his solo output, though I think Imagine is his best, and Ringo had "Ringo", which isn't a GREAT album like Band On The Run or All Things Must Pass, but is still an immensely enjoyable record (and after all, what good is rock and roll if it isn't enjoyable).
By and large, the other three were put in because they were Beatles, so I think it's only proper that Ringo get in there, because he did have some hits in the 1970s and he is still considered one of the most important figures in the history of rock and roll.
On Oct 5, 3:13 pm, poisoned rose <captainvinega...@aol.com> wrote:
> Wha? THAT is Newman's top achievement? You have gotta be kidding. > What makes me suspect you're only saying this because you saw the > song used in "9 1/2 Weeks"?
It's the song that came off the top of my head. Newman's a blend of American political wit (a la Dylan, Simon) mixed in with New Orleans sound via Los Angeles. His songs have a melancholy to them that's attractive to some and reworked by others.
As a songwriter, the pieces I think are his strongest are "Mr. President Have Pity On The Working Man" and "A Few Words In Defense Of Our Country," plus "When She Loved Me" from Toy Story 2 -- that song gets me every time I hear it.
> > Preston is closer to rock than most of this year's nominees. > More fretting over genre. Countless omitted acts are more important > than Billy Preston.
YOU HAVE MISSED THE ENTIRE POINT OF THIS DISCUSSION. This is about the ROCK AND ROLL Hall of Fame, and the writer of the original article on Fox's website laments the fact that given an industry that has produced so many great acts within the rock genre, this year's nominees seem to be beyond the borders that he (and many of us here) believe are the borders of a Rock And Roll Hall of Fame.
It's not a pop hall, it's not a rap hall, it's not a modern music hall, it's about ROCK AND ROLL. Granted, there are *numerous* acts I'd like to see more than Billy Preston -- Genesis and Electric Light Orchestra first and foremost -- but the general point still stands: the selection committee went after people who are far *less* associated with the genre than those low down on the totem pole.
> She basically has one big album as a solo artist. And an album which > was more "big" than "important" or "great." Not an induction > priority, given that she's already inducted for her more revered > work with Ike.
She was more revered in the 80s and 90s as an artist who fought to come back. She's a strong example of an African American woman succeeding in a generation dominated by white British males. Her successes may not be as high commercially, but as a symbol of the ROCK world, she is more deserved than Madonna to be on the ballot at this time.
Bonnie Raitt is another example of a songwriter who may not have had the commerical success but has had the respect and value in the industry for so long. She's paid her dues, and would be a nice acknowledgement of a successful woman in rock music's blues vein.
And if you want to deal with "great" albums, DOLLY PARTON. She had some crossover hits that put her as close to rock as Madonna. And she's a heck of a lot more important to building the connection that modern country has to rock than Madonna did for any other genre.
> I get really, really weary of people who argue about this issue, and > so badly muddle the distinction between "Should be inducted at some > point" and "Should be inducted NOW."
At this point, Madonna, Donna Summer and Chic can wait. They aren't strong rock and rollers; putting them at the front of the line is symbolic that the Hall has no one better. And given that 2007 - 25 = 1982, bands that were extremely strong in the seventies should have priority. Electric Light Orchestra belong in there NOW because by 1982 they were breaking down as a group; Genesis belongs in there NOW because the only thing left to celebrate is Invisible Touch, despite huge successes and far more influence in the decade before.
> Ringo's solo career is in no way Hall of Fame-quality. And > "Photograph" is a catchy pop melody which gained nothing except name > recognition from having Ringo sing it.
And Donna Summer's is? Chic's?
Photograph, by the way, is the name of his latest hits package. It proves that Ringo's career continues to put out good music. It may not reach the top of the charts, but Ringo's All Starr Bands have put a different spin on touring for older musicians, he's still attracting younger musicians to his recording sessions, and he was making the move into children's projects quite successfully before it became in vogue.
You may call it a mercy to be in there, but realistically, in terms of impact, the same argument can be placed against John Lennon. His biggest musical contribution as a solo artist was... what? Two Virgins?? If in today's world John's is being held up as an example of great songwriting (despite weak commerical success), if Paul's musical longetivity is being held up along with his expression in other genres and commerical success, and if George's charity concert is being held up as examples of good behaviours that new musicians should follow, then Ringo's activities deserve acknowledgement.
And Ringo needs to be there SOONER THAN LATER. The man's a senior citizen; Madonna, Donna Summer, Chic... not even close.
> > The Beasties > > were hardcore wannabes who's only major success was "You've Gotta > > Fight"
> Totally untrue.
The Beastie's own manager says they wanted to be hardcore in the film American Hardcore. The Beasties' stage show borrows a lot from the performance style of hardcore -- as, incidentally, so does rap. And in terms of non-rap music, "You Gotta Fight" IS their only big commercial success.
> If "having some hits in the 1970s" is reason enough to get into the > Hall (and get into it NOW), that really flings the doors wide open. > And if you're talking about pure hitmakers who don't have too much > cred as "artists of distinctive vision," folks like Chicago, the > Doobie Brothers, Neil Diamond, Hall & Oates and Linda Ronstadt > should get in long before Ringo does. Hell, I'd even vote for ELO > over Ringo.
Exit polling now shows:
ELO - 1
Ringo - 0
The race is still to close to call. Stay tuned throughout the night for updated results.
> On Oct 5, 12:24 am, "BlackMonk" <BlackM...@email.msn.com> wrote: >> > Diamond, Sedaka and Simon have among them dozens more actual rock hits >> > as writers and performers. >> Those three are barely rock, and Simon is already in with Garfunkle.
> Which all boils down to how you define "rock." Sedaka isn't modern > standards, but I'd argue that Simon and Diamond have both bordered > folk and rock long enough to be considered as part of the genre's > history.
Simon has. Diamond has some early pop hits that sound kind of folky, but that's just because they're built around a strummed acoustic guitar.
> If Simon is in there with Garfunkel, then go take John Lennon and Paul > McCartney out now. Same with Eric Clapton. You either go all with one > entry only (and sub-entries for solo years) or you allow it for > everyone.
Then since The Yardbirds are in there, Keith Relf should be in there as a solo artist?
> On Oct 5, 12:24 am, "BlackMonk" <BlackM...@email.msn.com> wrote: >> This article is a good example of what I was saying the other day. With >> most >> acts, there's no real reason why one should be inducted before the other.
> Totally agree.
>> Sonny Burgess is the man behind Elvis Presley? I could understand that >> claim >> for Scotty Moore or Sam Phillips, but Sonny Burgess? Burgess made some >> fine >> rockabilly records that didn't sell at all, but there's almost no >> connection >> between him and Elvis.
> Unless he's thinking about the founders category. Robert Johnson > didn't sell many records either and is in there, so why not put a > rockabilly founder in too? Plus, if you look at some of his > nominations [Fogerty, for example] there's a kind of touch on > rockabilly with CCR and that's it.
Elvis is already in there and he started recording two years before Burgess did. Carl Perkins also predates Burgess, though by a matter of months, not years. And if you want an obscure name, Billy Lee Riley was much more significant.
>> And the reason why The Beastie Boys shouldn't be there, but Randy Newman >> and >> Tom Jones should is...?
> The Beasties never aspired to be rock, just hardcore
Which is a form of rock.
-- then they
> found rap. (This is a point made by their first producer in the film > American Hardcore.)
> Randy Newman should be as a songwriter,
Even if he's not a rock songwriter?
which is a category's absence
> the writer laments. Newman wrote some fine pieces -- notably "Leave > Your Hat On" -- and, having seen him just this past summer I can tell > you that the wit and skill has never disappeared. His recent single, > "A Few Words In Defense Of Our Country" should be picked up by the > Republicans and played all through Washington: dislike Bush all you > want, he's no Emperor Nero or Vlad the Impaler.
> I think the idea with Jones, as I posted earlier, is that if you're > gonna induct Madonna, Jones is closer to rock than her.
Not really.
>> > Controversial Cat Stevens also stays in the cold despite his dozen or >> > so hits and his influence on singer-songwriters of his era.
>> What influence?
> That soft melodic sound of Cat Stevens, James Taylor and Harry Chapin
So it was a general movement, not specifically his influence.
> which everyone agrees is the softest sound of the seventies and paved > the way for "easy listening."
So he should be in the easy listening hall of fame.
"Cat's In The Cradle" and "The First Cut
> Is The Deepest" are still strong pieces no matter how you cut it. > (Personally, I say put him in as songwriter.)
Cat's In The Cradle was Harry Chapin.
>> Ok, I can see some of them eventually getting in, but Poco? The Turtles? >> Ok, >> they had some good records, but if "Happy Together" or "Devil With The >> Blue >> Dress On," is enough to get you in, so is "Bad Girls."
> Agreed. However, "Bad Girls" shouldn't be a rush to put in over Mitch > Ryder and the Turtles, since both bands had a number of records that > are 'rock.' For that matter, how about the Zombies with "Time Of The > Season" and "She's Not There"?
They should be in before any of the other acts. Donna Summer, however, was a major figure. You couldn't claim that for Mitch Ryder or The Turtles.
>> If Poco qualifies as rock and roll, so does Leonard Cohen, who has at >> least >> as strong a songwriting record as anyone in the above list and who was >> probably more influential than Cat Stevens.
> Agreed. Leonard is a fine choice for the Hall, but he shouldn't be the > only choice in the nominees that critics can point to and say 'yes'.
>> John, Paul and George are there as solo artists. Ringo deserves to be >> there as well, just out of fairness to the guy who -- as Photograph >> demonstrates -- continued to make good music.
> Ringo's solo career is in no way Hall of Fame-quality. And > "Photograph" is a catchy pop melody which gained nothing except name > recognition from having Ringo sing it.
I disagree with you here. Ringo's solo hits all were what they were because of the Ringo persona that his voice creates. If anyone else sang it, it would still be a good song, but it would come across differently.
> Rolling Stone Magazine Hits a Sour Note With Rock and Roll Hall of > Fame Nominees (Like Madonna) > Monday , October 01, 2007
> By Roger Friedman
> ADVERTISEMENT
> To anyone who's still reading or buying Rolling Stone: It's time to > boycott Jann Wenner's flagship magazine.
> I've never participated in a boycott - not of lettuce or grapes or > anything else. But enough is enough.
> After the announcement late Friday of the nominees' ballot for the > Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, there's only thing to do: Hit publisher > Wenner, who controls the Rock Hall, where it hurts.
> If you love rock 'n' roll, stop buying Rolling Stone until the > tremendous insults of the Hall of Fame are corrected.
> Wenner's nominating committee consists largely of his current and > former employees from Rolling Stone (Nathan Brackett, David Fricke, > Jim Henke, Joe Levy, Brian Keizer, Toure, and Anthony DeCurtis). But > they have little say over who really is inducted.
> Last year, in a story reported by this column exclusively, Wenner > threw out a vote in which the classic British invasion group Dave > Clark Five was voted in and changed it for another round that favored > rappers Grandmaster Flash.
> As one insider from the Hall has maintained, "Once Ahmet Ertegun died, > Jann felt like he could run wild." The legendary co-founder of > Atlantic Records was considered the only person who could control > Wenner. He died in 2006.
> The Dave Clark Five incident has repercussions, however. I'm told that > Wenner was made to meet Clark after I broke that story last March. The > group now is guaranteed entry, although it's a bittersweet win. They > are probably not, to paraphrase one of their hits, "Glad All Over."
> But this year's choices are a complete affront to fans of the Rock and > Roll Hall. And to show how much Wenner controls what's happening, the > exclusive announcement was made on Rolling Stone's Web site.
> If you're still reading or buying Rolling Stone, it's time to stop.
> This year's ballot shows that the Hall has skipped over the seminal > 1970s for the worthless '80s. The committee has chosen dance music > over rock. They've all but ignored the pioneers who influenced the > genre in favor of non sequiturs.
> The choices: dance group Chic, hip-hop pioneer Afrika Bambaataa, > mediocre Bruce Springsteen-wannabe John Mellencamp (a Wenner crony > who's lost out on many tries), white rappers the Beastie Boys, disco > queen Donna Summer and, of course, Madonna.
> Among "older" names: the aforementioned DC5, instrumentalists the > Ventures and Leonard Cohen.
> Here's the idea: that these names should enter the Rock and Roll Hall > of Fame before such historically important and influential acts as > Iggy Pop and the Stooges, "fifth Beatle" Billy Preston or performer/ > producer Todd Rundgren.
> They aren't the only ones.
> Major groups the Hall voters deem "not hip": The Moody Blues (simply > for "Days of Future Passed") and Chicago (for its first two seminal > albums). Hall & Oates, Yes, Genesis, J. Geils Band, Alice Cooper and > KISS are also names often mentioned by critics.
> Also left wanting: stars such as Carly Simon and Linda Ronstadt, who > were mainstays of Rolling Stone in the 1970s, have been iced out. > Carole King was inducted only as a writer with ex-husband Gerry > Goffin. Her achievement as the creator of "Tapestry," for years the > best-selling album of all time, has been ignored.
> Neil Sedaka ("Calendar Girl," "Breaking Up Is Hard to Do") is not in > the Hall of Fame. Neither is Neil Diamond ("I'm a Believer," "Sweet > Caroline"). That's right. They only wrote half the hits that modern > groups cover or sample. Go figure.
> The late Laura Nyro, who also wrote a dozen or so hits, is absent, as > is Leon Russell, whose songs "This Masquerade" and "A Song for You" > are among the most covered by pop acts. He also was a member of Phil > Spector's legendary band, as were other nonmembers Glen Campbell and > Sonny Bono.
> Then there are the R&B performers who remain in the cold, such as Tina > Turner, Dionne Warwick, Motown legends Mary Wells, the Marvelettes and > the Spinners, not to mention Ben E. King ("Stand by Me" and dozens of > hits on Atlantic), Stax Records legends Carla and Rufus Thomas, > Spector star Darlene Love, Joe Tex, Al Green and, of course, Chubby > Checker, whom the Hall denies over and over again despite his > invention of rock's greatest dance hit, "The Twist."
> Neither John Fogerty, Lou Reed, Peter Gabriel, Ringo Starr, Tom Waits, > Steve Winwood, Diana Ross, Steve Miller nor Sonny Burgess - the man > behind Elvis Presley - is in the Hall of Fame.
> OK, just so we're straight on why Rolling Stone must be boycotted. It > wants the Beastie Boys before Randy Newman, The Hollies, Tom Jones or > Mitch Ryder's "Devil in the Blue Dress."
> Controversial Cat Stevens also stays in the cold despite his dozen or > so hits and his influence on singer-songwriters of his era. And I > haven't even raised the idea of Poco, Aaron Neville, the Turtles, Gram > Parsons and hitmakers Three Dog Night, whose members made hits for > dozens of new songwriters including Harry Nilsson, John Hiatt, Jimmy > Cliff, Hoyt Axton, Paul Williams and Randy Newman.
> The Hall has caused its own problems over the years. It no longer > includes three categories that the Hall introduced, then eliminated: > Non-Performers, Side Men and Early Influences. The nominating > committee, with a couple of exceptions who are obviously ignored, is > simply too young and uneducated in popular music history to select > entries in those groupings.
> It's a pathetic, ridiculous situation and it must be stopped.
> Of the new crop, I don't have much to say that's positive. Madonna is > a steamroller because of the cult of personality. She's not a rocker, > she has a thin voice and she doesn't write all of her own material. > But she's a force of nature.
> There's no stopping Madonna when she wants something. Chances are good > she won't bring Steve Bray, Patrick Leonard, William Orbit and all her > writers and producers to the stage. They are Madonna.
> Chic is a fun idea with great songs, but it was really producer-writer > Nile Rodgers and his partner Bernard Summers who made it work as a > dance group. Rodgers should be in as a hugely successful producer of > music by David Bowie, Ross and others. Summers can be thanked. Chic, > however, is not rock.
> The rest are totally off base, given the above list. Summer was a > disco act. For her to get in before Ronstadt is a joke. Mellencamp at > least plays rock. But he's a minor note in the genre's history.
> Afrika Bambaataa and the Beastie Boys: Are they kidding? Even the > latter must be laughing. They had one big hit, "You've Got to Fight > for Your Right to Party." The former, while I'm sure quite lovely, is > a record-scratcher with a great name. Each of these belongs in a Rap > Hall of Fame.
> And it's not that I am against hip-hop or rap artists in the Hall of > Fame. But Run-DMC is the obvious choice for an act in that genre that > crossed into rock. Apart from its own music, Run-DMC's partnership > with Aerosmith on "Walk This Way" brought hip-hop to a new level and > standard. No one would argue with its inclusion.
> Of the two senior acts aside from the DC5, the Ventures probably are a > good idea. The Hall lacks instrumentalists. But Cohen should be in as > a writer. His morose style never once crossed into rock, and he knows > it.
> Diamond, Sedaka and Simon have among them dozens more actual rock hits > as writers and performers. Come on. And Cohen's songs have not had > nearly the same impact on rock as those by Jimmy Webb. He's also been > snubbed by Wenner's crew.
> By the way: The Hall of Fame Foundation, which Wenner runs with toadie > Joel Peresman, has nothing to do with the Rock and Rock Hall of Fame > Museum in Cleveland.
> "Jann treats the museum like a toy and has no respect for Terry > Stewart," an insider says. Stewart runs the museum with no regard for > Wenner's exclusions.
> Last year, the Hall claimed to have given away only $158,968 of its > $12 million war chest to needy musicians. It gave $56,236 to the > museum to maintain its own archives. The museum must raise its own > money.
> Peresman is thought to get between $300,000 - what the previous > director was paid - and $500,000.
> New board members include wealthy businessmen Craig Hatkoff (co- > founder of the Tribeca Film Festival) and Dirk Ziff (heir to a media > fortune), nice guys who have no connection to the music business or > rock 'n' roll at all. They're Wenner's friends. Famed rocker Jay-Z - > ha ha - also has joined.
> Former inductees to the Hall, by the way, must buy their own tickets > to the annual Waldorf-Astoria dinner. Tickets cost $3,500. Few, if > any, show up anymore for the big jam session at the end of the night.
> These selections for 2008 are terrible, but they're just the beginning > of what's going to be a weird ride, thanks to the new generation. To > wit: Kanye West is scheduled to be honored soon by the Chicago branch > of the Recording Academy.
> This means that other artists will have to perform a tribute to him by > performing his music. Only: He has no music. West samples existing > records. So someone will have to sample a sample to praise him. It's > sad.
> So: I don't know anyone who buys or reads Rolling Stone, but someone > must, since Wenner Media seems to make money. It can't all be Us > Weekly.
> Until real rock is served by the Hall of Fame, please don't buy > Rolling Stone or click on any of the ads on its Web site. Then maybe > Wenner will get the message that no one can take his Rock and Roll > Hall of Fame seriously anymore.
|
