We interrupt this Songs Of Proof parade to talk about the recent ceremony. The inductees have officially been enshrined, and the ceremony has long since wrapped. And there was a lot of drama. The Twitter stream gave a lot of insight, but after finally getting to see the edited version on HBO, it just seems that drama and controversy are par for the course. Even knowing that though, reading about the drama on Twitter, and then later seeing it on the HBO broadcast, it seems that the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame makes a point to hit rock bottom, and then keep digging. Also, shout out to the "Who Cares About The Rock Hall?" podcast. A lot of the things they said are things that I thought, too. Listening to their take on the broadcast helped me remember a lot of what I thought while watching it.
We'll start with the less controversial segments. Nice tribute to Tom Petty, good In Memoriam segment, with the Soundgarden tribute. I loved the speech for the Cars, but the performance was a little painful to listen to. Ric Ocasek sounded a bit like Pete Townsend. That's not a bad thing overall, but it just reinforces the aging rocker bit. Sounded like they were deliberately playing slower too. My thoughts regarding the Moody Blues are pretty much the same. That's what happens when you're not eligible until 25 years after your first recording. And if your band has broken up and you haven't been at it for several years, that's only going to make it even worse. Still, just glad that they're in, and that's all that really matters.
Great induction for Nina Simone, too. The tribute performances were just fantastic. I feel sorry for her brother, trying to say what Nina would have said, only to get politely cut off by Mary J. Blige. Similarly, a great induction for Sister Rosetta Tharpe and terrific performances. I didn't agree with everything that Nina said in the video clips, but who am I to disagree with the actual artist? Either way, just sad that neither lady was alive to speak at their inductions.
Which now brings us to the actual controversy and drama. We'll start by looking at the whole Dire Straits debacle. This really seems like a failure on a few different levels. First off, I don't believe for one moment that the Hall wasn't trying to find somebody to do the honors. As much as I want to be able to take people at their word, I'm just not inclined to believe Keith Urban or his people that nobody contacted them. I'm not saying he backed out when he found out Mark wouldn't be there, but I'm not going to assume he's telling the entire truth either. I don't let the Knopflers off the hook entirely either. Maybe being rock stars, they never really had any interest in the goings-on at the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame, but I can't believe they were completely oblivious to how the Hall operates. Ever since the Sex Pistols sent their letter of acrimony toward the Hall, how the Hall runs their ceremonies has come under scrutiny, particularly in its practices regarding fees and compensations, the prices that they charge for the dinners and better seats, etc. We've known about these things at least since 2006, so the Knopflers should have at least done a little homework. Maybe it never seemed all that important to them, but it shouldn't have been that big a surprise, either.
But that by no means makes the Hall innocent either. Let's be honest here, offering to recoup some costs, not others, then change which costs are what... the Knopflers' outrage is at least understandable. I've mentioned in the past the almost slipshod way the Hall puts together their events, certainly since they stopped holding them at the Waldorf-Astoria. Should the Hall pay for all flights and accommodations for the inductee? Should it be an all-expense-paid affair? Well, that'd be nice, but it sounds like that's not entirely realistic either. While it certainly is no business of mine or most of you who read this blog what the financial affairs of the Foundation are, when fiscal shenanigans are part of the cause of inductees staying home, and causing the ceremony to border on a shambles, then maybe it's time to take a hard look at how things are being managed, or at least how clearly they are communicated. I mean, the Hall shouldn't be on the hook if an inductee wants to bring their thirty cousins from England to share in their revelry, but maybe their kids and/or their parents? That can get a little dicey when you're inducting a band that had ten members that you're including, though that doesn't mean that the Hall should limit the number of members if they are actually important to the band, but being honored means more when you are able to share it with loved ones.
Also at fault are the people in charge of the actual production, especially at the eleventh hour. The accounts vary, naturally, but the general gist is that when they couldn't find somebody, John Illsley suggested that he could induct his own band. Apparently someone in charge of the production liked the idea either as a lark or thought it would be a fresh and original take on it, and decided to run with it. Even when Robbie Robertson offered at the last minute to say a few words, they turned down the offer in favor of the self-induction. And that's how it went. Illsley gave the induction speech, but on the TV broadcast, it sounds like the woman doing the announcing was actually inducting them... when she called them up to the stage. It looked pretty sad on television, and must have been even sadder in person. Whoever the production executive was that greenlighted the self-induction and turned down Robertson's offer, needs to be disciplined posthaste. The idea in and of itself was rock bottom stupidity. It wasn't fresh and novel, it was embarrassing and disrespectful, and gives the impression that maybe Dire Straits didn't deserve the induction after all. I mean, I ranked Dire Straits last in terms of merit compared to the rest of the artists on the ballot, but even I believed they actually did deserve to be inducted. They finished near the bottom of personal taste for me, and even I would have taken time off from work to go to Cleveland and induct Dire Straits. I could have whipped up a few words in their favor. It could have been at least like the induction of Van Halen; instead, it was an all-time low for the induction ceremonies. If nothing else, the 2019 induction ceremony should begin with Robbie Robertson, or somebody, getting up and saying, "First, a little bit of unfinished business..." and give a proper speech for Dire Straits. Make it right.
And lastly, the induction of Bon Jovi. The presentation as televised makes it abundantly clear Bon Jovi was meant to be the headlining act, and it was only because there was no way Howard Stern would sit through the whole event that they were moved up to opening. But the broadcast was edited to make them last, and that their induction alone would be about one-third of the running time, because that's how HBO wanted it. As for Stern's speech... about what one would expect from him. In other words, the bar was low. Going after Cream, Leonard Cohen, and Bob Dylan. And... I'm sorry, why? Not only are these all artists that have strong merits of their own, but these were all artists that were inducted before Bon Jovi was even eligible. What good does it do to diss artists who got in before yours could even be brought up for discussion? Exactly none. All it does is make you look like an uneducated hatemonger. Then there's the merits that Howard Stern spoke of. Oh sure, their humanitarian work is pretty awesome. No one's denying that. But when you consider that the Rock Hall has long been more of a rogues' gallery than an upright citizens' brigade, it's pretty much a non-starter to talk about it. The way they paid their dues? Cool. And a ton of other artists have done it too, and have gotten into the Hall. But there is of course the ultimate dwelling point for Stern, the one hundred thirty million records sold. I really don't need to expound on it too much. Joe and Kristen from the "Who Cares About The Rock Hall?" podcast said it all perfectly. Art quality is not so simply quantified,. Now, much like the podcast hosts, I too agree that there is room for populism in the Hall, and much of the problem with the classes of late is that the Hall denied populist acts for so long. But the Hall for a long time was about recognizing rock and roll music as an artform. This turn for the popular may seem like a complete and utter betrayal of its principles. Personally, I think it's a balancing out of priorities. At a later time, I intend to talk more about commercial success and the Hall, but for now, suffice to say that being a commercial juggernaut definitely helps, but it's not the only thing. The way that "Livin' On A Prayer" symbolizes and epitomizes the 1980's and the spirit of the youth at the time should have been given many more words by Stern. And while Howard did briefly hint at it, their longevity, and ability to survive in the wake of the grunge revolution and the domination of rap by the mid-'90's, should have been given at least as much focus as the sperm-beating record sales. Stern's speech conflating quality with quantity is PRECISELY the reason that the Hall worked to keep Bon Jovi out for so long. That's not even getting to the band's speeches, mainly Jon's. Though I do have to give Jon full credit for mentioning his work on the Star Wars Christmas album. I thought for sure he'd want to bury that, but he mentioned it loud and somewhat proud. Gotta love it. The performances... well, yeah it's kind of stupid to perform new songs, but then again, U2 performed "Vertigo" at their induction, though that song was a year or two old by then, but still their most recent. Personally, I think if a band's still going strong and putting out hit records, go for it. I'm just not certain if that really applies to Bon Jovi's situation.
I'm not even going to get into the Singles category right now. That's a whole other rant, I assure you. And I'm late as it is just getting these thoughts up. 'Til next time folks. We now return you to our regularly scheduled Songs Of Proof programming.
"Art quality is not so simply quantified."
ReplyDeleteI agree that ranking art is usually pretty silly, but people do it and these guys are the best:
http://www.acclaimedmusic.net/top_artists/t0.htm
They've aggregated more critics than even sites like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic have I think and go back further in time. I enjoy looking at this site a lot (along with thegreatestbooks.org for books and theyshootpictures.com for movies, which are probably all the most comprehensive for those media) while agreeing that the idea of ranking art is stupid. They are all at least good sources for introducing you to things you may not be familiar with.
Obviously some people are ridiculously overrated and some are critically underrated. Invariably things that contrarians think are great but most people hate (Britney Spears) will tend to be rated higher than things everybody thinks are good but are less often cited for greatness (Stevie Ray Vaughan, criminally underrated here.) You can see this on the other lists too where things like "Plan 9 From Outer Space" and "Showgirls" are rated over some Best Picture winners on TheyShootPictures too, just because many people prefer great camp over works acclaimed at the time that strive to be important that are very good but narrowly fail to make greatness.
Clearly the low rankings of some acts here (Moody Blues, Judas Priest) explain why they were snubbed so long. But then that goes along with the existing biases traditional critics tended to have for prog and metal. Since the Hall has bias towards guitar rock acts and acts that had mainstream popularity in the US, you could pretty much adjust that list by putting greater weight on what the American as opposed to international critics said along with adding the unfortunate classic rock skew and the popularity skew and pretty much predict who will get in. I think it is something you likely should weight some. Each link to an artist or song does list each specific ranking with the periodical or critic or book that listed them too, so you could really get into this and figure out each critic's specific biases or whatever, but I haven't done that much.
From a Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame perspective given the American skew it clearly overrates British acts that had massive influence there and minimal influence here. Then again it shouldn't just be about American acts. While there are lots of ridiculous things in this ranking, I still find it generally interesting.
And it does seem that the reason the pre-Beatles era is underrated is simply because there was much less music criticism then and as a result those artists appear on far fewer lists and are inevitably underrated as a result (also the weight towards albums probably affects this as well), and that probably has something to do why '50s and '60s acts are increasingly snubbed as of late.
For all the talk about Bon Jovi's lack of critical acclaim, they were actually ahead of Moody Blues, Rosetta Tharpe (sadly), J. Geils Band (no surprise there), Judas Priest, Link Wray, The Meters, and Rufus & Chaka Khan (although I don't know if Chaka jumps them if you add in her solo career). Bon Jovi does seem to be an artist critics are overrating due to their popularity for sure as I think most people in the know rank most of those higher. But what I do like about it is that makes this a less snobbish and more eclectic list than you might expect.
Philip
ReplyDeleteA good insightful of the RRHOF 2018 Ceremony. I really enjoyed the Moody Blues induction. They have always been classy, gentlemen type guys. For 70 year old guys, I thought they had a strong performance. I'm Just A Singer In A Rock And Roll Band shows Moody Blues can still deliver a rocker. They deliver. You touched on The Dire Straits induction. Very cumbersome. The RRHOF could have filmed a 10-15 minute video with Mark Knopfler and his brother talking about the band. Their origins, FAV songs, and maybe play a little acoustic. You might remember when a group is on tour and they win a Grammy or an award. They either flash on them in before song thanking the Committee for the award or they do a prepared 5 minute video thanking fans and the Committee. It was definitely an opportunity missed. I have always respected Bon Jovi. He's usually a good guy from many of the interviews I've seen of him. He's done plenty for charities and things. This time, I thought he sounded a little cocky and entitled. I saw that soundbyte when Bon Jovi was talking with the Moody Blues. A few days B4 the Induction. Moody Blues and many groups waited years longer than Bon Jovi for induction. I thought their performance was good. The Singles to me was an intelligent move. Some of those singles inductions get a Procol Harum and Steppenwolf some acclaim and prestige. The Cars were impressive to me. They appeared to be truly moved and honored. You could see in their demeanor that Orr's death still resonates with them. Class guys. Stern has always been a polarizing figure. Some of the comments were humorous but other things distasteful. I liked when he talked about how Bon Jovi worked themselves up from nothing. Playing gigs at clubs and places.