"This Rock Hall class is too big!"--literally no one

I thought about snappier titles for this entry, but you know what?  If casual observers (or especially any powers-that-be in the Foundation) see nothing else, I want them to see that.  Just over a week ago, the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame announced their Class Of 2019.  And it's a glorious class for a few reasons.  I'll spare the recap, and just try to weave the names of the inductees into the commentary.

As everyone else has pointed out, this is the first time we've had this many Performer inductees since 2004 (not including the six groups that were included by the decision of a special committee in 2012).  That's the first reason this is so awesome.  A lot of people have had this or that to say about the inductees, whether each inductee is deserving of the honors or not, who missed out that deserves induction, what does it mean, and so forth.  But if you look up at the title of this post, that is the most common thing to take away.  Everyone is shocked that there are seven Performer inductees, but everyone is also happy about it.  Everyone is posting hopeful thoughts that this will start a trend to bigger classes, and hopefully facilitate changes in the voting process... maybe allow voters to vote for more than five?  That'd be cool to see.  Make the classes bigger and you can avoid a lot of controversial practices and decisions.  People are happy that it's this big and want the practice to continue.  The only people who might complain are the folks at HBO or the people at the Barclays Center not affiliated with the Hall who worry about the event running long.  But if they're good at their jobs, they can work with it.

The second reason this is so awesome is because of negligence being corrected.  The first big one I'll mention is The Cure getting inducted.  This is momentous because ever since the Cure's first nomination for the Class Of 2012, the Nominating Committee has been making the effort to represent alternative from the 1980's.  It actually goes back a little further than that, with U2 and R.E.M. getting in as newly eligible acts, but both of those had a tremendous amount of commercial success, mainstream airplay, and reliably semi-continuous chart presence for years.  The Cure are a slight step down from those two bands in that regard.  They had a strong string of charted singles, a couple of which still get airplay occasionally, but their numbers aren't quite in the same stratus as R.E.M., and certainly not U2.  The segment of rock and roll history that the Cure represent has been struggling to get proper accolades from the Hall, but now that this has finally happened, there's renewed hope for the Smiths and the Replacements, not to mention hope for Pixies, Joy Division, and Sonic Youth, just to name a few.  Next, the negligence of Radiohead getting passed over has been corrected.  The Hall always tries to recognize monumental acts in their first year of eligibility, and the fact that Radiohead had to miss once is a shame.  It also raises a little concern since Outkast and Beck, just to name a couple, had to miss out on nomination just to get Radiohead in this time.  It's still unknown what happened last year, but it's also moot at this point.  Another ignored segment is art-rock.  There hasn't been a whole lot of representation of this, outside of Talking Heads.  The commitment to it was doubly noted with the additional nomination of Devo, but the nomination of Roxy Music and their forthcoming induction next year really shines a light on it.  When people talk about the origins of art-rock, this is usually the first group that gets mentioned, and their induction will add a huge amount of credibility to the Hall's statement of recognizing the evolution of rock and roll.  The last segment that has been suffering neglect, but getting some love this year, is '80's R&B.  To be fair, there's been a little bit of it: primarily rap.  But even in stylings that aren't rap, we have Prince and Michael Jackson (and Daryl Hall And John Oates if you consider them R&B--I don't).  But it's Michael's sister, Janet Jackson, that is being honored and represented this time around.  And make no mistake, she is a major force of R&B.  The first success or two you can possibly pin on her family name.  But look at the whole of that family: Tito never had a solo hit on any chart, having to do that vicariously through his children, the members of 3T;  Rebbie, Jackie, Marlon, Randy, and LaToya all only had a hit or three each to their own names across the various Billboard charts (primarily the R&B charts); Jermaine actually had a sizable amount of hit singles, and though "Let's Get Serious" is still an awesome jam, even his career pales in comparison to Janet's.  The brotherly quintet didn't even have the same longevity and hit-making power that Janet did.  In fact, when people think and speak of the Jackson Five, it seldom gets beyond 1971.  It's mostly about "I Want You Back," "ABC," "The Love You Save," "I'll Be There," and maybe "Mama's Pearl," or their takes on a few Christmas staples during the holiday season.  The rest of their catalog tends to be forgotten.    Point being, the family name may have gotten her into the room, but it didn't keep her there.  And good production teams can help, but like bad source material, lack of talent can't be continually dressed up and remain successful for that long.  I know that opens up a can of worms regarding other forms of entertainment, but let's do our best to avoid that.  Janet's legit, she's getting her proper respects, and she brings some sorely needed recognition to the world of '80's R&B.

Switching gears, the parade of awesome comes through in the generations being represented.  Others have taken note of Radiohead, the Cure, and Roxy Music getting inducted in the same class when the immediate lines of influence are right there together in the same class.  Beyond that, you have a band that's only in its second year of eligibility getting in, and there's also some love and recognition for the old guard.  At long last, the Zombies are being inducted.  People are torn about how many acts from the '60's and '50's are still worthy of induction.  My number of acts from that period is significantly higher than most other hobbyists.  In fact, it's probably one of the highest among people who haven't served on the NomComm at some point.  But whatever the number a person may say, the Zombies have been a name that most have agreed probably should be inducted.  How pressing the need to induct them varies, but they're a name that few see and say, "Oh no, they should not go in ever."  The Zombies plant a foot firmly back in the '60's, and I'll be honest, I'm nowhere near ready to close that door.  I'm really hoping more that the Zombies open the door to get more recognition for this generation of artists.  But in terms of painting a picture or making a collage of rock and roll, the inclusion of the Zombies add an extra layer of depth that make the general feeling of this class feel less hollow and more sweet.

I'll add as an afterthought that I'm not nearly as chuffed as some other hobbyists at how many British acts are getting inducted in this class.  Part of me is excited that the recognition is happening, but it's a little weighed down as well.  First, Kraftwerk missed out.  Kraftwerk is the most deserving of the nominees that could have really steered the conversation away from an Americentric viewpoint.  Hopefully, the five British bands will help grease the axles to get Kraftwerk in soon.  The other component is the gender and racial imbalance in the Hall that has been a continually favorite criticism.  I'm unaware of any Black British inductees, and aside from Dusty Springfield and Christine McVie, I'm unaware of any British women who've been enshrined.  And this class doesn't add any more either.  So, in light of the pressure to get away from inducting more White men, that's exactly what's happened here.  So, it's great that we'll have more international points of view voting, but it doesn't quite signal the paradigm shift some have been looking for.

Fellow hobbyist Michelle Bourg commented with special ecstasy on the inclusion of Stevie Nicks as well, not so much for her actual solo career, though she also has no qualms about that so far as I'm aware.  What makes this class wonderful for her, and for me as well, is that there will be an induction of two female acts.  Not an act with at least two women in it, like Salt-N-Pepa or a girl group from the '60's, but two acts that included women.  This will be the first time since 2007 that two all-female acts are inducted in the Performer category, when the Ronettes and Patti Smith both broke through.  2010 saw two women from ABBA inducted, plus two songwriters from two husband-and-wife teams.  2012 saw Claudette Rogers Robinson get in via special committee to join Laura Nyro as a Performer inductee.  2013 saw the Wilson sisters inducted with male members of their band, as well as Donna Summer.  2018 had a second female nominee inducted, but in the Early Influence category.  It is with cautious optimism that I celebrate the induction of two female acts in the same class.  True, I would've preferred Chaka Khan to have been the other female inclusion, with her band Rufus instead of Nicks, but this is still great regardless.  I know I'd been a harsh critic of Stevie Nicks' nomination as a soloist, even dedicating an entire entry on women I'd rather see inducted twice than Stevie.  Hopefully, though, the explanations I gave for my opposition are understandable, even forgivable.  I'll address the one of my reasons a bit more fully momentarily, but as far as who should be or should've been the first, it's a moot point.  I'll just have to find a way to be okay with it, because it'll happen whether I do or not.  In the long run, it's okay.  I still don't know what makes her solo career worthy of induction and not Ringo Starr's.  I mention that again because people who vehemently opposed the idea to induct Ringo as a Performer for his solo efforts were strangely acquiescent about the thought about Stevie being enshrined a second time.  One argument has been that as a solo artist, she's a feminist icon.  I don't know that I believe that, but as a man, I also recognize that it isn't exactly my bailiwick, much less my purview, to say who's a feminist icon or not.  Either way, I don't think that's a good argument for induction into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame, but also either way, it's still good because it breaks down a decade-plus-long barrier and hopefully ends any manifest or latent mindset with the voting bloc that they can or should only vote for one female act.

One of the things that makes this class so awesome, though, is actually a little bittersweet, at least for me.  The induction of Def Leppard continues the ongoing trend of the top finisher in the fan vote getting ushered in.  And I have no problem with the band being inducted.  I do love their music.  But Stevie Nicks and Def Leppard were not only the two highest finishers in the fan vote, but also the two highest vote recipients in the museum's poll for who should be nominated.  The Hall is definitely increasing their efforts to include the general public in the process.  That's actually really cool.  The Hall has been frequently criticized in the past for intentional obliviousness to the desires of the public, eliciting such pejoratives as "private club."  It's great that the common man's demands are coming to fruition and that the barriers are crumbling down in relatively quick succession.  But take a step back and really consider it.  How far do we really want to take this?  Great, we've got Rush, Chicago, and KISS inducted because of public demand, but don't forget how narrow the general public's definition of "rock and roll" has been.  The fan vote is a constant reminder that the British Invasion's interpretation of what constitutes rock and roll is the prevailing opinion, if not the only definition worth enshrining, according to John Q. Public.  Not to mention that the reasons some people want certain acts inducted are due to personal memories.  Or just plain ignorance.  On the "Who Cares About The Rock Hall" podcast, Joe Kwaczala and Kristen Studard discussed Stevie Nicks' ascent to top spot in the poll at the museum, and how after voting for Nicks, museum patrons were afterwards heard to comment, "Oh, I didn't realize she was already in with Fleetwood Mac!"  That kind of ignorance to how the Hall operates and to the distinctions between Fleetwood Mac and Nicks' solo efforts only lends further credence to the saying, "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."  It's why, at least on the surface, it makes sense to leave the nominations and voting to people who actually are highly knowledgeable: people who make their living out of knowing and learning these things, or are actively involved in the creation of the music.  Granted, vested interests have become a tremendous problem, but ideally, the diversity of knowledgeable people should work to correct that.  Theoretically, anyway.  The point is, though, the sway of public opinion should only go so far.  Interviews since the nominations announcement tell that nobody flinched at the mention of Def Leppard, and that the women of the committee banded together to push for Stevie Nicks over other female acts; however, we were never told who specifically nominated each of those acts.  Were they nominations officially submitted by the museum vote, or are they names that members of the Nominating Committee saw suggested and thought they were worth officially nominating?  I do dread the notion that finishing first and second at the museum automatically ensure slots on the ballot.  I like the idea of the top two finishers being the official fan submissions at the meeting itself, but there shouldn't be an automatic for the people at the Feast Of The Giant Hoagie.

Finally, I want to address something that was said when the inductees were announced.  When discussing rock and roll as a concept, Joel Peresman did kind of a verbal shuffle, not refuting claims that rap and R&B aren't part of rock and roll, but rather that rock and roll is more of an attitude or image.  No.  No it's not.  Rock and roll is a form of music.  And that should be especially paramount for the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame.  The Hall spent a lot of time, energy, and money to properly establish rock and roll as a musical diaspora, drawing from several sources, incorporating other genres, and birthing a multitude of sub-genres.  Peresman's comment is tantamount to backpedaling on all of that.  It's about the music, not the image (also why I don't accept Stevie Nicks' "feminist icon" status as sufficient justification).  Joan Jett's induction with the Blackhearts was initially celebrated for her "riot grrl" image that she brought to the table.  But now, when critics and commentators look back, her induction is regarded among the iffier selections by the institution.  And besides which, images change over time.  Coolio's iconic hairdo has succumbed to male pattern baldness, but the significance of "Gangsta's Paradise" hasn't budged an inch.  Madonna has undergone multiple image changes, but her music endures.  Bono no longer has the Irish mullet, nor does he dress up as his Mirrorball Man or Mr. McPhisto personae from the ZooTV tour, but the catalog of Boy through Achtung Baby still holds up and is still venerated.  And you know why?  Because it's ultimately the music that matters.  Not the image.  Celebrate that.  Keep it about the music.  Or as Chrissie Hynde said when she was inducted in 2005, "Boom boom.  Boom boom.  Never change.  Keep moving forward, but never change."

So, there's a lot to love about this class, and maybe a thing or two to be cautious of.  I'm a little saddened that no other categories are getting inductees, but there's still much to celebrate.  And speaking of celebrating, Merry Christmas to you and yours, and Happy New Year.  Celebrate responsibly.

As a bonus, here's a list of years and entrants where multiple female entities have been inducted.  Bold print shows a class where more than one female-containing act were inducted in the Performer category; normal print is for those years where the other categories had to be included. Italicized print indicates special committee involvement for the Performer category.  Let me know if I missed any, and I'll edit.

1990: Zola Taylor (of the Platters), Ma Rainey, Carole King (of Carole King And Gerry Goffin)
1991: LaVern Baker and Tina Turner (of Ike And Tina Turner)
1993: Ruth Brown, Etta James, Cynthia Robinson and Rosie Stone (of Sly And The Family Stone), Dinah Washington
1995: Janis Joplin, all inducted members of Martha And The Vandellas
1996: Gladys Knight (of Gladys Knight And The Pips), Grace Slick (of Jefferson Airplane), all inducted members of the Shirelles, Maureen Tucker (of the Velvet Underground)
1997: Mahalia Jackson, Joni Mitchell
1998: Christine McVie and Stevie Nicks (of Fleetwood Mac), Cass Elliott and Michelle Phillips (of The Mamas And The Papas)
1999: Dusty Springfield; Cleotha, Mavis, and Yvonne Staples (of the Staple Singers)
2000: Billie Holiday, Bonnie Raitt
2002: Brenda Lee, Tina Weymouth (of Talking Heads)
2007: all members of the Ronettes, Patti Smith
2010: Agnetha Faltskog and Anni-Frid Lyngstad (of ABBA), Ellie Greenwich (of Ellie Greenwich And Jeff Barry), and Cynthia Weil (of Barry Mann And Cynthia Weil)
2012: Laura Nyro, Claudette Rogers Robinson (of the Miracles)
2013: Ann and Nancy Wilson (of Heart), Donna Summer
2014: Patti Scialfa (of the E Street Band), Linda Ronstadt
2018: Nina Simone, Sister Rosetta Tharpe
2019: Janet Jackson, Stevie Nicks