The only way Van Halen should be inducted into the hall of fame is with the original members. All the others were talented, but the original members set the stage. They made Van Halen what it is.

From a long time listener, totally influenced

"Hell, it is tradition for the inducted bands to perform"

While some do mend fences for a cordial evening, when CCR was inducted John Fogerty didn't allow the rest of the band to join him.

DLR's return for a concert tour rumor appears to be picking up steam again. I hope they don't screw it up again.

at this point, who eally cares about Van Halen. it was pretty clear to me during most of the Sammy years that Eddie had nothing left to say with his guitar.

maybe that's changed, but i'm not counting on it.

Even though I enjoyed F.U.C.K., I knew Eddie was empty when he reached for that drill on "Poundcake."

I don't think anyone expects a new album of anything interesting. They are now, if they want to be, a nostalgia act and maybe just maybe they can credibly replicate their past glories on a stage. At one point, I would have done anything to see Dave and the band. Now? It'd probably be pretty fucking silly. I'd still be curious, though.

And it is true about not all fences being mended at these things. Blondie had some issues last year as did CCR before it. Not everyone observes the tradition.

I saw the recent Van Hagar tour (a pal got free 9th row tickets). While I wasn't awed by anything new, I was definitely impressed at how well they recreated their classics. I didn't get to see Roth-era VH, so I will be going to the reunion with no expectations other than having a good time. And maybe I'm one of the few, but I liked the new Roth songs on the best-of.

I remember Blondie from last year. It would have been funnier if it hadn't been pathetic. That's fine if the band broke up and only some of the band is out touring, but to see the old guys asking to sit-in on the night the band was being honored made the whole event pathetic.

And WTF is Blondie doing the Hall anyway?!

El B, I am with you on those two new Roth/VH songs on that best of. I liked them both. Still, that was 10 years ago.

I think Dave would embarrass himself. I would love to have seen a real Roth/VH show. I think that ship has sailed.

i didn't know that dave was capable of being embarrassed.

OK, Dave would be an embarrassment. Good point.

REM's Automatic for the People - one of the greatest sleeper albums of all time. I hated it for the fist 2 or 3 listenings, and after that, it just got better & better.

Maybe Van Halen will jam with REM - that would be cool. Right - as much a chance of that as them letting their distant relative in with his accordion.

Oh, this Van Halen thing is going to be too good to miss. It has all the hallmarks of a classic trainwreck. Technically, they are all invited. What will be interesting is Eddie has fired everyone except his brother.

Roth is a total ass, but he is a big chunk of Van Halen. I think it is going to be like the Blondie Hall of Fame incident. Remember? The band wanted to play and she said "no, you guys tried to sue me". It was awesome.

I think they will all want to jam, but Ed will insist his son be the only bassist. He (Eddie) freaked out and fired Michael Anthony. When a reported asked about him, Eddie said something like "I don't care what ________ is doing". He had named Michael Anthony by his birth name, which no one had ever heard before. I don't even remember it now.

I used to be a fan of Eddie, but he keeps firing folks and claiming its them. It reminds me of my brother who goes through a new job every 4 months but always blames everyone else.

Eddie wil have this chance to rise above all of this and jam with them all. I'll bet he won't. He seems bent out of shape about Michael Anthony jamming with Sammy, which is stupid. Since Van Halen releases an album about every 10 years, one can expect them to do other things.

Patti Smith is the star of these inductees, for you to say I am sure they are all deserving on one level or another is a joke. She was the beginning of punk rock. Listen to some of work and you will agree she is way overdue to be inducted.

Lono pretty much hit the nail on the head with Van Halen!

All I have to say is what about Iron Maiden?!?
Criteria:
-25 years after the release of their first record. Check
-Influence and significance of the artist contributions to the development and perpetuation of rock and roll. F*cking Check!

Hell, they would kick everyone's ass in a live performance on that show!!

Congrats! A link to this article now appears on our Myspace Profile page.

Many thanks, Connie. I can't believe it took me so long to get a story on this news posted.

Mr. Bob, while I admit to not being thoroughly familiar with Smith, I don't think of her as the star of this nor do I think she deserves full credit for the birth of punk. She's an influential figure in music and has a cult following, but "star" might not be the word I'd use for her.

R.E.M., meanwhile, has a lot of artistic credibility and integrity while also having had some strong commercial success. They, to me, are the real stars of this proceeding.

The Old School R.E.M. deserves to be recelebrated. I remember going to what amounted to their first commercially successful tour, the Green Tour. When they would introduce songs from older albums a woman next to me would say "I didnt know they had other albums". Reckoning was fun. Document was amazing. Life's Rich Pageant was awesome. Fables was significant and Murmur is an exceptional debut. I hope that R.E.M. goes old school with their performance and brings their old stuff to a new audience. I hope they play Talk About the Passion or Pretty Persuasion and...perhaps something wicked from Letter Office, like Ages of You or Crazy.

MikeyMike, I agree there were a lot of great songs from those early days but a HoF induction is about recognizing the totality of a career. I think it would be unfortunate if they chose to put too much weight on either the early or the latter period.

"Technically, they are all invited."

Lono, taking any wagers on Gary Cherone getting invited?

Brian is right about IM. If Grandmaster Flash and the Ronettes get in, Maiden should be there as well. My overlooked inductee is The Cure. They meet the criteria.

ElB, The Cure most certainly deserves induction and with all due speed. It's a crime they're not there now.

Of course, it's at this point I get snarky and snippy about the whole RRHoF. Well, I guess I started that in the post proper. I'm sorry, but Jann Wenner and his cronies running this thing have had some peculiar admissions/omissions.

DJ, much like any award group, it's who the judges are and I'm sure most don't know The Cure. Plus, the definition of Rock and Roll gets looser with each year that passes.

As far as admissions, I don't get why they are sticking every Motown group in. Some were certainly deserving, but how many girl groups do we need? They all didn't push the limits.

And Billy Joel? Talented songwriter certainly, but he's a pop artist. Nothing wrong with that, but I have yet to see his influence or effect.

The Lovin' Spoonful? They had a couple of memorable songs, but please. And I am with you on the whole overemphasizing of the Motown crowd. First, I'm not sure how R&R some of them are (R&B, more like) and some of them were not distinguishable from their peers to begin with.

What I don't get is how artists like Grandmaster Flash or the Motown acts, wonderful as they are, get anywhere near even being considered Rock'n'Roll?

I'm also with Mr. Bicho about The Cure...

Granted, I'm not a huge fan but you can't listen to The Killers or any of that over-exposed "Indie" crap without hearing some sort of rip on The Cure.

Honestly, if we wanna heavily focus on their criteria you would have to add these bands as inductees as well:

RUSH
Yes

Despite his extensive contributions to the Four Seasons, Joe Long remains the only member of the group's "definitive line up" not inducted into The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland.

hi people

When is this event going to be televised.

Later

Would someone please let me know when this will be televised. i have to see it. Thankx

The R&R hall of fame was once a very special place to me. A shrine to worship those that took music and song to the highest level. To hear of hip hop and rap inducties sickens my insides. I guess this lets the memories of the past, real masters more sweet. I can only hope that Brad Delp passed on before hearing of this, or was this just to much for him to bear? I have to guess that money and politics have now forced this too. Was it not rap, hip hop and country music that pounded the most nails in rock's awaiting coffin? Country has its own hall of fame. Can't this so called sub-genre have thier own too? No, because they are parasites and best be forgotten. Till then this sub-genre of hip hop and rap should be called "crap".

Dave should be singing.

Of course Billy joel is Rock N' Roller to the BONE. He defined piano rock and allowed other artists to play rock on the piano not just on the guitar. Just because he was popular does not make him rock any less. Joel was as complete an artist as there is and was. His music reflects influences include Broadway/Tin Pan Alley, jazz, blues, ska, gospel, pop, and even Russian folk songs, to straight-up rock & roll. Scences from Italian Restaurant is a masterpiece, and his early concerts in the mid- 70's were legendary. A lot of bands today owe him respect and He is an Rock icon for sure!!!!

If this has been touched on before, forgive me.

I appreciate Van Halen and their collective works. Great rock and roll band. That said, how can Sammy Hagar be inducted having not been with the band for, what I thought was, a 25 year pre-requsite? When Springsteen was inducted it was without the E-Street band for the above reason.

And Grand Master Flash??? Friggin Jan Wenner's a poser.

It is amazing that sixty years after blacks INVENTED rock 'n' roll that people want to evict them from the Hall of Fame that celebrates their creation!

If rock 'n' roll had stuck rigidly to its original definition then there'd be no white artists included at all. The fact that rock continued to evolve is what allows artists like Dylan, the Beatles, The Ramones and Neil Young, not to mention Van Halen and R.E.M. to be included in the genre itself and the Hall of Fame - and deservedly so. But their music is only tenuously connected to that of Fats Domino, The Orioles, Ruth Brown and Hank Ballard & The Midnighters that was the original rock music, and believe it or not Grandmaster Flash's records are closer in structure and spirit to those artists in many cases than R.E.M. or Patti Smith's records are.

Basing it on merit they are all (white and black) deserving of induction because each have exemplified groundbreaking impact on the larger and truly diverse field of rock 'n' roll. Unfortunately too many people's historically inaccurate revisionist perception of what rock 'n' roll is constitutes a very narrow viewpoint and results in this kind of elitist racist mentality that calls for the Hall to exclude anyone and everyone these people don't personally listen to, like, or care about, regardless of their qualifications.

They already have Halls of Fame for people's own interests - it's called your own record collection. The real Rock 'n' Roll Hall Of Fame is far from perfect, but it at least has some integrity in terms of accepting the full scope of rock music, unlike much of what is seen elsewhere when criticizing it.

I resent the implication that my objection to Grandmaster Flash is any sort of racist thinking. You can disagree with my opinion but to assign that kind of motive is unwarranted and insulting.

I disagree with the argument you present, as well, but I'm not going to fling poo.

The comments I responded to were made by multiple people, not just the original essay, in which Josh stated - "Let hip hop have its own Hall of Fame - far, far away from my Rock and Roll Hall of Fame." That in of itself is offensive racially, as well as elitist. It is no one's individual HOF, not Josh's, or mine, or anyone else's, it is a HOF that is supposed to represent the full spectrum of music under the rock 'n' roll umbrella, of which hip-hop is a very large part today.

Some of the ensuing comments left by others seemed to reinforce this black/white schism. Tim's comments of March 11th appear proudly racist (referring to hip-hop as "parasites" and "crap") and as well as mj's outright hostility towards it ("And Grand Master Flash??? Friggin Jan Wenner's a poser"). How is that supposed to be taken exactly?

The calls from others for Motown to be excluded, or at least receive fewer inductees, are not malicious in anyway, but they seem to present no arguments other than the poster's own perception that they are somehow vaguely not deserving of induction based on skin color (DJRadiohead - "I am with you on the whole overemphasizing of the Motown crowd. First, I'm not sure how R&R some of them are. R&B, more like"; followed by Christopher Rose's post - "What I don't get is how artists like Grandmaster Flash or the Motown acts, wonderful as they are, get anywhere near even being considered Rock 'n' Roll").

Those comments imply that the black half of rock be questioned for their eligibility as rock 'n' roll itself. There doesn't have to be anything racist intended for those comments to be historically challenged at the very least. They may even have seemed perfectly innocuous to the authors who'd be sad to hear they offended someone, but that doesn't change the misconception they offer that black music is something else entirely and should be segregated based on pigmentation, which those words certainly seem to suggest, intentionally or otherwise.

If someone wants to claim that's not the case, that it is the musical similarities, or lack thereof, to other artists in rock's history that is the question in their minds, not the skin pigmentation of the candidates, fine. But why then not also say that since Van Halen's and R.E.M.'s music are in no way similar to one another, let alone to Bob Dylan or The Four Seasons or The Everly Brothers or countless others, that they too should be in their own separate Halls of Fame based on the same surface appearance of musical differences that would exclude Motown or rap?

Sorry, but when it appears that all black artists need first to defend their classification AS rock 'n' roll before any objective discussion of the value of their respective achievements can begin, then something is not right. That was what needed to be addressed.

You can't really fault the logic in RK's argument here. I do however think it somewhat misses the point. From what little I know of Josh Hathaway as a person, I doubt very much that he is a racist. Elitist? Perhaps. But certainly not someone who I suspect will be getting fitted for a white hood anytime soon. I think the point being made is rather one of the R&RHOF being somewhat truer to the purity of well, rock and roll. Personally I think people like Grandmaster Flash, Marvin Gaye or B.B. King belong there every bit as much as people like Van Halen and R.E.M....possibly even more so. But I know that nobody would quibble with the induction of people like Jimi Hendrix, Prince or even Sly Stone based on something like skin color. The bottom line is that this is a "Rock & Roll" hall, and those people play, well rock & roll.

-Glen

That in of itself is offensive racially, as well as elitist. It is no one's individual HOF, not Josh's, or mine, or anyone else's, it is a HOF that is supposed to represent the full spectrum of music under the rock 'n' roll umbrella, of which hip-hop is a very large part today.

To assume my thinking hip hop is not rock and roll is racist is, it seems to me, to deny there are white hip hop artists. That says something to me right there.

You're playing the race card, not me. You're tossing around assumptions about people's intentions in a real cavalier manner. I live in a world where people can talk about music and musicians without being accused of having racist tendencies. That's just bullshit.

I'm through on this thread.

Josh,
If someone during a political conversation brought up a view long held in communist circles, it wouldn't necessarily mean they were in fact a communist themselves, but it would be 100% accurate to call the comment itself a socialist view.

Similiarly, for a person to say something that can easily be interpreted as racist doesn't mean the speaker is himself a hood-wearing Klansman, only that a particular statement they made has potentially racist connotations, even if that wasn't the intended meaning behind those words.

Furthermore, for me to say that I find it offensive racially is accurate. That was my personal and honest reaction to what I saw written. The comment you made in the essay, and incidentally the only one of yours I referred to while quoting four others as well, was clearly inflammatory by nature. Just the wording of the phrase you chose ("far, far away from my Rock 'n' Roll Hall Of Fame") assured that antagonistic tone by design, so to be upset that it generated a powerful natural response in someone who read it should've been expected at some point.

What I don't understand now however, is why in two responses to my comments you haven't tried to clarify what legitimately might have been mis-interpretations on my part, nor have you tried to defend the position that rap does not belong in the Rock 'n' Roll Hall Of Fame using factual evidence regarding to the boundaries of rock. If you "disagree with the argument I present", as you said in your response to my first post, then I would think you'd want to explain why, or at least to tell me, and others who read this, what you are basing your disagreement on.

After all, while I was critical of what I perceived to be disturbing views, I've also stated both an historical case regarding rock's lineage and laid out why the seemingly casual dismissal by many people of entire blocks of predominantly black rock styles while seeming to accept any and all diverse white styles without question, is wrong, and yes, offensive.

I can't judge you personally after all, I can only judge what you attach your name to. Your comment regarding Grandmaster Flash was only one aspect of what was written here by a number of people that needed to be questioned (and hopefully better explained by all of the authors). I understand that since it is your essay that headlines the page itself that you'd be more sensitive to criticism regarding anything on the page and I should've realized that and made it clearer from the start that it was a broad-based critique on what seems to be a widely held unsettling viewpoint.

But race IS the issue here, like it or not. When multiple people can simply offhandedly call for countless black artists to be excluded from a Hall Of Fame celebrating their own cultural creation and no one even notices that for 5 months, let alone is offended by it, that is a very real and serious issue that needs be addressed. It is not "playing the race card", it is a wholly legitmate request to want it discussed, something I am still hopeful that can be done here. But to say "I'm through with this page" in response to that solves nothing, it only makes things worse. I hope you reconsider.

RK, as far as I personally am concerned, race is most certainly not the issue.

Rolling Stone has clearly had a brainfart if it considers Hip-Hop to be a part of Rock'n'Roll. Even though I love both a lot of Rock and a lot of Rap, for my money the latter is a far superior genre, having been truly creative for a longer period of time than Rock, which hasn't had much of a new idea for quite some time now.

"You can't really fault the logic in RK's argument here."

Yeah, you can, Glen, although I have yet to see RK use any. Unfortunately its his own "elitist racist mentality" that skews his view of the world.

He thinks that because some don't think Rap belongs in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, the opinion is directed at the artists' skin color and not their work. By his "logic," since I don't think Garth Brooks and current Country music belong in the Hall either, do I think white people should be evicted?

He also writes, "The calls from others for Motown to be excluded, or at least receive fewer inductees, are not malicious in anyway, but they seem to present no arguments other than the poster's own perception that they are somehow vaguely not deserving of induction based on skin color."

That is so blatantly false it is barely worth giving any credence to it by acknowledging it. If RK had written there were no arguments as to why Motown shouldn't have as many inductees, that would have been fine as no one did make a case against, but to spin that into "they are somehow vaguely not deserving of induction based on skin color" is absolute bullshit on his part. When ever was an artist's skin color made until RK appeared?

The Hall of Fame is to honor the best, not honor everyone. I do question what Martha and the Vandellas, The Shirelles, and The Ronettes have done that qualifies them. You get no argument from me that they are talented groups with a number of good songs. I also questioned the inclusion of Billy Joel, yet RK makes no mention of me having a problem with Joel's skin color. Why is that?

If RK wanted to have a serious discussion about the merits of Rap and Rap artists regarding the HOF, I would have been open to it, although I obviously couldn't have taken part because I am white. I either have to share his views or I am labeled a racist, so what's to discuss?

I suspect that most if not all of the commenters here are not identified as racists of any kind in their everyday lives. Over the timetheey have written on bc they have also proved they know their popular music history well enough to be aware of the contributions made by the artists who were there at the dawn of rock 'n'roll's creation - both black and white - some raised on blues and some raised on country.

I think the question to be addressed is this: are we talking about a popular music hall of fame, or something more genre specific? And what would the criteria be?

AS for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, in a nutshell, to me: Charlie Pride - no; Miles Davis - no; Hendrix - yes. And for the same reasons: Buck Owens - no, Dave Brubeck - no; Jimmy Page - yes. Easy enough.

Bicho,

I thought some of RK's points were made rather eloquently, thats all. But to level the racist tag against Josh, you, me or anybody else based on a random comment taken out of it's intended context is of course bullshit.

I get the whole idea of trying to keep the R&RHOF a Rock hall, and the fact that color has nothing to do with it. I'd include people like Hendrix, Chuck Berry, and Prince without question. As artists outside of the genre who still had a profound influence I'd probably also consider folks like Miles Davis, Marvin Gaye, and B.B. King -- just as I would Johnny Cash for example.

My comment was actually intended somewhat in Josh's defense though. I only know Josh through what he writes, and have never met him or even spoken with him on the phone. Based on that, he has never come across to me as anything even remotely approaching racist. Thats the main thing I was trying to communicate.

-Glen

Alright, as I can see this debate has been spun in an unintended direction, let me re-state the larger question in a different way and maybe it'll make the point better and more amicably.

So here's the question, very simply:

WHAT CONSTITUTES ROCK 'N' ROLL AND WHY? USE ANY DEFINITION YOU'D LIKE - MUSICAL, CULTURAL, HISTORICAL - BUT THEN PROVE IT THE BEST YOU CAN USING EVIDENCE.

My point has been that people seem to be using personal definitions of what rock 'n' roll is based largely on their own opinion or perceptions and therefore no two definitions are the same. As a result whatever they choose to include and to exclude in that definition is bound to upset somebody else, especially if they don't appear to offer credible reasons for those decisions.

Since this question is the same for everybody, regardless of their view, it will force people to actually sit down and try to clearly explain and defend their definition of "rock 'n' roll" on the same footing as everyone else. Hopefully that will help clear the air and keep the discussion music-oriented.

Well, let's start at the beginning, shall we?

Elvis, Jerry Lee, Chuck, Fats, Little Richard, Carl Perkins, Buddy Holly - names off the top of my head that I wouldl consider rock 'n' roll artists above any other genre - sure, Carl Perkins was "rockabilly," but for my money that's nitpicking. And sure Chuck Berry could play blues well enough, but that's not how he's usually remembered.

So, I'll go out & stand in the mainstream to say rock and roll was originally a popular music culture that borrowed from both black and white musical traditons, regardless of the race of the artist.

I would further go that for anything to be considered rock 'n'roll, it has to be able to trace it's influences back to this point.

Handoff to whoever wants it.

I'd run this one in for the touchdown JC, except that I don't risk an interception.

-Glen

dont WANT TO risk an interception (meant to say above)

(It sounds so much more clever when you actually write what you meant to say).

-Glen

'S OK, Glen - double reverse lateral is jus' fine.

How're things? Drop me a line (if I don't drop you one first).

Sk.