September.... when kids go back to school and there's that nip in the air, that the Nominating Committee is soon to meet and decide what the ballot for next year's Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame class will be. And for some reason, we enjoy trying to predict which names will be on the ballot. I don't entirely get it either, but I enjoy it. Maybe it's because it's harder to predict the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame's nominees than it is to predict Oscar, Emmy, Grammy, or Tony nominees. Maybe it has to do with the downsizing of the number of members on the NomCom. That certainly will make things much harder to figure out, because the patterns that we look for may no longer be all that trustworthy. Whatever it is, here we go again.
As I read the predictions of other people, I feel like a lot of the left field picks and seeming fillers are mainly driven by hope against hope. I'm actually going to try to go in the other direction as much as possible. In recent years, there haven't been too many acts on the ballot that I absolutely love. Sure, last year we got Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble and the Spinners, but the point is, the majority of the ballot is comprised of artists I'm lukewarm to or just don't like. Not that I'm complaining too loudly, though--most of my favorite acts have already been inducted. Still, I feel like where there are gaps to fill, I need to make sure I'm filling them with acts I can either take or leave or would actually prefer not to see at all. With that happy thought to help us fly off to Neverland, it's time to predict the nominees for the Class of 2016.
First off, the no-brainers. Chic will be back, because the higher-ups at the Foundation will not be ignored in their love for Nile Rodgers. I've said this before, but at some point, they're just going to decide that it doesn't matter where Chic finished in the votes, and induct them anyway, even if they also have to induct every act that got more votes than Chic, which means, we could be looking at a class with 15 Performer inductees. I'm also speculating that Nile Rodgers will finally retire when Chic is inducted and he no longer has to keep the name recognition up.
Next, another act that was guaranteed to reappear even without any new mojo working for them, N.W.A. will certainly return. Between the biopic Straight Outta Compton, the new work from Dr. Dre coming out, and the tidal wave of big name rappers becoming eligible starting next year, the pressure will be overpowering to get these guys inducted.
But rap isn't the only part of the rock 'n' roll spectrum with that tidal wave about to crash. Next year, Pearl Jam becomes eligible, which means all the acts that were influenced by Nirvana, Green Day, and Pearl Jam will subsequently follow in the coming years. So, with that in mind, it's probably a safe bet that Nine Inch Nails will come back for a second nomination.
The past two years, there has been a clear enough favorite among the newly eligible artists to predict which would be nominated. This year, not so easy. It is however, pretty widely held that only one of two will make the ballot. One is Alice In Chains, with a strong fanbase and solid music to back it up. The other is Smashing Pumpkins, which with the bolded name, means that I'm predicting them. Their music is accessible enough to the older members of the NomCom, and Billy Corgan is that kind of cantankerous enigma that is often attributed to genius. Not the Kurt Cobain tier of genius though... more like Axl Rose.
Next up we come to what is horrifyingly yet accurately described as the Death Fairy pick. A major star dies since the last nominations were announced and now the push to induct that person posthumously is on. And the Grim Reaper has been busy this year. A lot of people think that along with the NomCom's habit of bringing back seemingly forgotten past nominees, the token early '60's salute, and the nod to soul, Ben E. King is fated to be nominated again. But I don't think so. I would be thrilled to the moon if they picked Lesley Gore, but I'm not putting her name in bold either. Re-reading what I wrote near the top, time to go dystopian. When in doubt, pick the act you hate. So, and with the hype kicked up by people like Billy Joel, I'm betting Joe Cocker will be put on the ballot this year. I really don't want to predict him, but it's probably going to happen. And hey, now that Linda Ronstadt and Joan Jett And The Blackhearts are in, we need another cover artist on the ballot, and Cocker just fits the bill. And let's make it a two-fer. A key member of Yes passed away this year, and I don't like prog all that much. Plus they were nominated two years ago, so they're due to return.
Speaking of due to return, the classic rockists will be thrilled to see Deep Purple return to the ballot. As far as I know, Tom Morello is still on the NomCom, and if he was so impassioned to push for KISS, I can't see him turning a blind eye to Deep Purple, who will likely be the runaway favorite on the fan ballot if they are nominated. Another recent addition to the NomCom is ?uestlove. Up until now, I was skeptical, but optimistic that the Induct Janet campaign would finally succeed in getting Janet Jackson on the ballot. But with the recent tweet from ?uestlove, I now no longer hold that belief. While they could both be nominated, I really doubt they'll want to divide the ballot between Janet Jackson and Chaka Khan. Two R&B divas on the same ballot just won't happen, I don't think. So while Janet's more deserving in my opinion, ?uestlove has shown his cards and will be pushing for the former Rufus frontlady. And no, I don't believe it'll be another nomination for Rufus with Chaka Khan. And I hope they don't. That mess was bad enough with the (Small) Faces, but then again, the Hall seems to thrive on controversy these days, so who knows?
As for '80s alternative, a name has found its way onto the ballot each year, not gotten in, and didn't return the next year. So, out with the Smiths, and in with Pixies, whose names were to be found on the updated list of "Previously Considered" artists on the Future Rock Legends site. My initial gut reaction says to go with Sonic Youth, and the new memoir from Kim Gordon seems to insist on that push, But if being part of "Hervana" wasn't enough last year, will a memoir be enough this year? Possibly. Maybe they just wanted to focus on Joan Jett And The Blackhearts last year and so had to nix Sonic Youth. But I'm going back to my rule of picking the act I don't like, and I like Sonic Youth more than Pixies, so it means Pixies are more likely to be nominated. However, since I'm making this up as I type it, I may also add Sonic Youth if I find myself at fourteen names, and don't feel like going to left field.
Circling back to Joan Jett And The Blackhearts, let's pick another name recently associated with her. Despite the recent purge of the NomCom, there actually might still be a '60's act on there. And as Jett, and Green Day, and others have shown in past years, the Hall loves those that love the Hall. A token sign of respect may prove sufficient to get Tommy James And The Shondells on the ballot.. As a side note, I would find the juxtaposition of Tommy James And The Shondells and Joe Cocker on the same ballot to be hilarious: an act that was extremely well-known at the time that turned down the chance to perform at Woodstock because their manager dissuaded them, and a singer that the world only knows and cares about because he appeared at Woodstock. Anyway, at first, I wasn't sold on James and company, and still am not entirely, especially with the purge of NomCom members this past year. Still, it fits the ass-kissing motif that threads its way through this annual event. So would the nomination of the J. Geils Band, who is a known favorite of Master In This Hall, Jann S. Wenner, The combination of Peter Wolf inducting the Paul Butterfield Blues Band this year, the fact that the Paul Butterfield Blues Band were also another big favorite of Jann S. Wenner, and the general trend to acknowledge the blues as part of rock 'n' roll, it just seems too likely to ignore Jerome and the gang.
Along with the blues, there's usually an effort to acknowledge soul and singer/songwriters. Last year, the Hall killed two birds with one stone by nominating Bill Withers. I actually have a sneaky suspicion, they'll try to do this again. Happenings at the museum should not always be ignored either, and this year saw the unveiling of the exhibit highlighting the clash of the worlds of rock 'n' roll and politics. The Hall has always loved politically charged acts, so between soul, singer/songwriters, and sticking it to the man, there's a gnawing suspicion that the name of Gil Scott-Heron could stun a few people. Granted, Scott-Heron is known most for his slammin' poetry, and when I went looking for his albums, I found them in the jazz section of the music shop, but he did a lot of singing, and there're a lot of elements of soul and funk in his songs. So, I'm betting the NomCom will throw his name on the ballot and call it good enough when representing soul music. Also, like Pixies, Gil Scott-Heron is one of the twenty-five new names added to the Previously Considered list.
My next pick may seem a bit askew, but it's not too far out to be left field... maybe deep at third. For starters, I'm not totally convinced anymore that Kraftwerk will return. Second, the NomCom purge could mean more '80's acts making the ballot and into the Hall. Third, there will probably be some representation, besides Chic for danceable pop music. Lastly, I turn to an old bit by fellow monitor Lax, who for a couple years used to drive others crazy with his assertions whom he knew beyond a shadow of a doubt would be inducted this year. The thing is, his dream class wasn't a bad class, just the unfounded confidence that it would happen. That ire has since been re-appropriated towards another member who does much the same thing, but I digress. Of Lax's dream class, three have been inducted: Peter Gabriel, Donna Summer, and Cat Stevens. I can't remember who the fifth was, and may have been an arbitrary fifth member, but all things put together, it wouldn't be a huge stretch to predict the Eurythmics. So I will. Two slots left, and I'm tapped. Let's hedge our bets a little. As promised, I'll predict Sonic Youth after all, and we'll also throw in War, a good nominee any year, but always struggles to rise to the top of the conversation.
There you go, my fifteen selections. To recap, in alphabetical order:
-Chic
-Joe Cocker
-Deep Purple
-the Eurythmics
-the J. Geils Band
-Tommy James And The Shondells
-Chaka Khan
-Nine Inch Nails
-N.W.A.
-Pixies
-Gil Scott-Heron
-Smashing Pumpkins
-Sonic Youth
-War
-Yes
Compared to the mid-season report, my opinion has shifted on the greater half of my choices, which is actually pretty significant. In the past, I've been lucky if I got six nominees correct, and that'll probably be the case again. Let's wait and see.
Monday, September 7, 2015
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Mid-season 2015
Falling behind more and more, but this is just a quick little mid-season check.
Honestly, I think they should just take the remnants of this ballot, and call it a nine-act ballot, and let's induct at least another six. You'd get a solid class out of that, even if Sting was one of those six. I don't like Kraftwerk, or Nine Inch Nails, and not a huge fan of N.W.A., but they all deserve induction. Chic is a dead weight that we need to jettison, and induction's the only way that's gonna happen. And I both like and believe in the merits of the Marvelettes, the Spinners, the Smiths, and War, Any six of those nine, and you've got another decent class.
Regardless, that doesn't mean any of them are going to make the ballot later this year. It's a pretty good guess that both N.W.A. and Chic will be back. I'm gonna stretch a hair and say that both Kraftwerk and the Marvelettes will return as well.
The upcoming crop of newly eligible acts has some people clamoring, but I really don't know if any of them will appear. Everyone is calling Alice In Chains and Smashing Pumpkins locks to be nominated. I'm not sold on either one. And if Janet and Whitney are still not in, then Mariah Carey's not gonna be nominated anytime soon either. So all that, in my opinion, gives Nine Inch Nails another nod, and I doubt they miss twice.
The Death Fairy's been busy recently, and while Joe Cocker is a favorite among fellow Monitors and some members of the powers-that-be, I think he'll get passed by. Lesley Gore is certainly high profile, but my faith in her ever getting the induction she deserves has diminished. Still, I think a recent, high profile death will yield a nominee, and at present, it looks to be Ben E. King. The Hall enjoys adding members to the Clyde McPhatter Club, and Ben E. would be a great addition, even if he hasn't been nominated in almost 30 years.
Six names picked and they're all repeats. Any new names? Yes, I think the NomCom will repeat the habit of scrapping an '80s alternative act when they fail to get in and replacing it with another one. This time around, instead of the Smiths, we'll probably get Sonic Youth. Also, Despite not being on the ballot last year, I'm still going by ?uestlove Gomez's shirts and say at some point we will see the Average White Band nominated. And on the rap front, we may see Toure sneak a second act on the ballot, possibly De La Soul. With Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble inducted at last, and with the queue cleared by getting the Paul Butterfield Blues Band in, the blues and blues-rock field is wide open. Pretty good chances that Johnny Winter is next in line there. With David Letterman retiring soon, he made his plea, particularly to bandleader Paul Shaffer, to try and get Warren Zevon into the Hall at last, so maybe his request will be honored. There is certainly no shortage of people who agree with David on that one. And while the Marvelettes and also Chic represent the female gender, perhaps they'll try to add another member of the feminine persuasion to the ballot. Perhaps with Joan Jett in, it's time for Pat Benatar to get her due.
Let's throw three more repeats in to top it off. Deep Purple, Yes, and the J. Geils Band to all return, to placate the classic rock crowd.
Off the top, off the cuff. Something to do while waiting for the ceremonies to air.
Monday, April 20, 2015
I hate these blurred lines.
There are several reasons why I'm slow to start a new post: busy work schedule, difficult to get started, jumbled thoughts that I'm having trouble organizing, general laziness. In this case, all of the above, with two new stitches: desktop computer gone kaput, and medical issues. All that to say, sorry I didn't get this one up sooner.
In the previous entry, I lamented the pigeonholing of Ringo Starr in the Award For Musical Excellence category. You may have also missed that I similarly lamented the induction of the "5" Royales in the Early Influence category. However, the "5" Royales are only the most recent, and not even the most blatantly wrong example, of an act that should have been inducted in the Performer category, only to get the side door induction of the Early Influence category. Other fairly recent and more unpopular inductees in this category have been Wanda Jackson (in 2009) and Freddie King (in 2012).
In all fairness, while also perhaps most damning, the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame has always had a little bit of a problem with the line between the Performer and Early Influence categories. On the Rock Hall website, before they changed the layout, the timeline for 1986 Early Influence inductee Jimmie Rodgers included the charting of songs "Honeycomb" and "Kisses Sweeter Than Wine." Not good. And the next year, the induction of Big Joe Turner was in the Performer category, but the Top Pop Singles books from Joel Whitburn always include a special notation of "Blues pioneer" next to his induction as a Performer. Next, look at the 1990 class on the Rock Hall's website right now. Click on the link for Charlie Christian. A guitarist for the Benny Goodman orchestra until his death in 1942, he's listed on the Rock Hall's website as a "Performer" inductee, which is just plain factually inaccurate. However, as bad as those examples are, and as bad as the side door inductees of Wanda Jackson and Freddie King were, perhaps no class decries the lack of clarity more so than the Class Of 1991. Indeed, fellow monitors, as I have also done, have scratched their heads wondering how John Lee Hooker, a blues musician whose career began in the '40s, who recorded most of his discography in the '40s, including his most innovative and influential recordings, gets inducted as a Performer; while Howlin' Wolf, a bluesman whose first recordings were in the early '50s, whose signature songs were in the mid-to-late '50s, gets inducted as an Early Influence. To add further confusion to that mound, nominated for that same class as a Performer, but didn't make it, was blues guitarist Elmore James, whom you might recognize as an inductee in 1992, in the Early Influence category! Why Performer one year and Early Influence the next is a baffling question that only came to a head when people started asking why Wanda Jackson was nominated as a Performer but inducted as an Early Influence. Add to that Pete Seeger's illustrious solo career, despite beginning in 1954, meriting Early Influence status, though there it's much more obvious that this is simply the worst, yet-to-be-corrected case of Front Man Fever.
So the Hall has a clear and established record of fudging with this category. Why only in the past ten years have people started calling attention to it? I suspect a good deal has to do with the Internet making things easier to track and discuss, but part of it also may be the confusion in drawing lines of distinction in what's rock and roll and what isn't, and that it wasn't until the induction of Wanda Jackson as an Early Influence in a class where she'd been nominated as a Performer that people perked up and noticed those very circumstances and started to cry foul. It certainly has been no help that the Hall had been mired in murmurs in previous years: Miles Davis inducted as a Performer in 2006, even though the man himself denied being anything other than jazz--not even jazz fusion (and that his career as a billed artist began in the '40s); the accusations of ballot tampering in 2007 leading to Grandmaster Flash And The Furious Five getting in instead of the Dave Clark Five (or both together); and the coincidental induction of the Dave Clark Five the next year.
But what I suspect made Wanda's situation different was that not only was she unquestionably rockabilly in the beginning, only to go full country later on, but that she was initially under the wing of none other than Elvis Presley himself. Practically being the protege of the King should most likely result in disqualification from being called "Early Influence." Take that however you wish, it's really intended more as a timeline than anything else. Needless to say this only made things more confusing with Freddie King's induction in 2012, especially given that Freddie's first release wasn't until the late '50s, and that fellow bluesman Buddy Guy was a Performer in 2005, while another fellow bluesman Albert King was inducted as a Performer a year after Freddie got the side door treatment. While Freddie was more blues than blues rock, he was no less rock than Buddy or Albert, and it still seemed bad form to shoehorn him in as an Early Influence when he also had been on the ballot for Performer.
Which brings us to the "5" Royales. What to do? In all fairness, there's a solid argument to be made for Early Influence. Steady releases beginning in 1952, which most music historians call "pre-rock", certainly helps; however, perhaps most favorable for the Hall is the fact that if you listen to their records, their sound is much more primitive or "proto" as an R&B styling than it is the well-known version we got from Performer inductees like the Flamingos, the Moonglows, the Platters, and even the first incarnation of the Drifters. It's a fair evaluation to say their sound was rawer than the sounds that really reached out across racial barriers, from acts less likely to be inducted such as the Five Satins, the Harptones, and even the Five Keys.
However, there is also sufficient cause to say they should have been a Performer inductee, namely that they were nominated twice for that honor in the past. As with Elmore James, we are left asking why they were Performer then and an Early Influence now. Even worse, vocal R&B, aka doo-wop, is that territory that most music historians would also recognize as rock and roll at its most basic and earliest. So now you're breaking up a stone that is critical to the foundation of rock and roll. Is it really smart to go down that road? How will they handle this in the future? It's all but certain that if the Clovers are ever inducted, it will also be as an Early Influence. But what about acts like the aforementioned Five Keys, Five Satins, and Harptones? Some would argue that I'm putting the cart way before the horse, as it is unlikely those acts will ever be nominated, let alone inducted; however, not only have all three been Previously Considered, it's an important question to ask because the slope is already getting a little slippery to keep credibility intact (and even then some would say that ship has sailed). They've already hammered at other stones, like rockabilly with Wanda Jackson. What if they decide they owe something to lesser-known-but-still-important '50s guitar hero and rock outfit Buddy Knox And The Rhythm Orchids? What if they want to induct Chubby Checker as an Early Influence because he was an early precursor to EDM? Or Lesley Gore for being an original standout figure that paved the way for "riot grrls" like Joan Jett?
This is why I oppose fellow monitors who suggest the "movable timeline," that Early Influence is best applied to those who predate, but helped laid the groundwork for major patches of musical mini-epochs. By that logic, the MC5 are a prime candidate for Early Influence induction for predating, but heavily influencing punk. It's ridiculous: rock 'n' roll music is constantly evolving, and everything that is current is potentially significant in its pre-dating of something to come. That doesn't make what we have now, "not rock." And that's the latent effect you're ultimately having when you call a musician or group "Early Influence" instead of "Performer." You are decidedly declaring it as "not rock 'n' roll." I've already dealt with people in real life who think that REAL rock 'n' roll didn't exist until the Beatles came along or until Bob Dylan plugged in, or think that if it ain't hard or metal, it ain't rock. And every once in awhile some chucklehead will spew ignorance stating that soul, reggae, and rap have nothing to do with rock 'n' roll.
This is why I can only be marginally happy for the "5" Royales when they get inducted as an Early Influence, instead of Performer. Or Wanda Jackson. Or Freddie King. (Or Ringo Starr as AME, but that was last entry.) When you get an award, it's supposed to mean something. But when you play the game the way the Hall is doing it now, it becomes less meaningful. Its integrity is compromised. It's why I'm infuriated when the inductees or surviving family members (and fellow non-affiliated fans and even fellow Monitors) are so gracious about induction. It pains me to know that they're not getting their full or proper due. I'm told I should just be thankful that they ARE getting official recognition in some capacity. But I'm not. I can't be. Earning the award you're given within its proper parameters is rewarding. This is a pity induction, and it shouldn't happen this way. Do it right, or don't do it at all.
I won't go so far as to say the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame Foundation owes it to us to get it right. No, but they DO owe it to the inductees, the inductees' surviving families and loved ones, history itself, and even to themselves, for their own credibility's sake. Having rabid fans howl about their favorite acts getting snubbed is one matter. They're like the fans at a football stadium cheering their favorite teams. By claiming to have guidelines and categorizations for inductees, the Foundation sets themselves up as refs, so to speak. And I won't even go into the mess you get when, by that analogy, Jann S. Wenner is posturing himself as rock 'n' roll's Roger Goodell. Nope, not gonna go there. I'll let Tom Lane do that. The point is, we as fans hate bad calls, and that the Foundation owes it to the players (of instruments, including voice) to make the correct calls, for the good of the game (music history). When they can't do that right, the whole league suffers, especially when a quick peek at Future Rock Legends' Revisited & Projected project shows a plethora of worthy candidates for Early Influences still not inducted into the actual Hall, including but not limited to Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Ella Fitzgerald, the Mills Brothers, the Carter Family, Blind Lemon Jefferson, and the Four Freshmen.
So let's make a point to be more consistent, shall we? Maybe a rule that says once they've been nominated for Performer, they can never be inducted as an Early Influence? That sounds like a pretty reasonable idea to me. As is, the Rock Hall loses esteem for every year they continue to make the distinctions even blurrier.
And to quote Robin Thicke, I hate these blurred lines.
In the previous entry, I lamented the pigeonholing of Ringo Starr in the Award For Musical Excellence category. You may have also missed that I similarly lamented the induction of the "5" Royales in the Early Influence category. However, the "5" Royales are only the most recent, and not even the most blatantly wrong example, of an act that should have been inducted in the Performer category, only to get the side door induction of the Early Influence category. Other fairly recent and more unpopular inductees in this category have been Wanda Jackson (in 2009) and Freddie King (in 2012).
In all fairness, while also perhaps most damning, the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame has always had a little bit of a problem with the line between the Performer and Early Influence categories. On the Rock Hall website, before they changed the layout, the timeline for 1986 Early Influence inductee Jimmie Rodgers included the charting of songs "Honeycomb" and "Kisses Sweeter Than Wine." Not good. And the next year, the induction of Big Joe Turner was in the Performer category, but the Top Pop Singles books from Joel Whitburn always include a special notation of "Blues pioneer" next to his induction as a Performer. Next, look at the 1990 class on the Rock Hall's website right now. Click on the link for Charlie Christian. A guitarist for the Benny Goodman orchestra until his death in 1942, he's listed on the Rock Hall's website as a "Performer" inductee, which is just plain factually inaccurate. However, as bad as those examples are, and as bad as the side door inductees of Wanda Jackson and Freddie King were, perhaps no class decries the lack of clarity more so than the Class Of 1991. Indeed, fellow monitors, as I have also done, have scratched their heads wondering how John Lee Hooker, a blues musician whose career began in the '40s, who recorded most of his discography in the '40s, including his most innovative and influential recordings, gets inducted as a Performer; while Howlin' Wolf, a bluesman whose first recordings were in the early '50s, whose signature songs were in the mid-to-late '50s, gets inducted as an Early Influence. To add further confusion to that mound, nominated for that same class as a Performer, but didn't make it, was blues guitarist Elmore James, whom you might recognize as an inductee in 1992, in the Early Influence category! Why Performer one year and Early Influence the next is a baffling question that only came to a head when people started asking why Wanda Jackson was nominated as a Performer but inducted as an Early Influence. Add to that Pete Seeger's illustrious solo career, despite beginning in 1954, meriting Early Influence status, though there it's much more obvious that this is simply the worst, yet-to-be-corrected case of Front Man Fever.
So the Hall has a clear and established record of fudging with this category. Why only in the past ten years have people started calling attention to it? I suspect a good deal has to do with the Internet making things easier to track and discuss, but part of it also may be the confusion in drawing lines of distinction in what's rock and roll and what isn't, and that it wasn't until the induction of Wanda Jackson as an Early Influence in a class where she'd been nominated as a Performer that people perked up and noticed those very circumstances and started to cry foul. It certainly has been no help that the Hall had been mired in murmurs in previous years: Miles Davis inducted as a Performer in 2006, even though the man himself denied being anything other than jazz--not even jazz fusion (and that his career as a billed artist began in the '40s); the accusations of ballot tampering in 2007 leading to Grandmaster Flash And The Furious Five getting in instead of the Dave Clark Five (or both together); and the coincidental induction of the Dave Clark Five the next year.
But what I suspect made Wanda's situation different was that not only was she unquestionably rockabilly in the beginning, only to go full country later on, but that she was initially under the wing of none other than Elvis Presley himself. Practically being the protege of the King should most likely result in disqualification from being called "Early Influence." Take that however you wish, it's really intended more as a timeline than anything else. Needless to say this only made things more confusing with Freddie King's induction in 2012, especially given that Freddie's first release wasn't until the late '50s, and that fellow bluesman Buddy Guy was a Performer in 2005, while another fellow bluesman Albert King was inducted as a Performer a year after Freddie got the side door treatment. While Freddie was more blues than blues rock, he was no less rock than Buddy or Albert, and it still seemed bad form to shoehorn him in as an Early Influence when he also had been on the ballot for Performer.
Which brings us to the "5" Royales. What to do? In all fairness, there's a solid argument to be made for Early Influence. Steady releases beginning in 1952, which most music historians call "pre-rock", certainly helps; however, perhaps most favorable for the Hall is the fact that if you listen to their records, their sound is much more primitive or "proto" as an R&B styling than it is the well-known version we got from Performer inductees like the Flamingos, the Moonglows, the Platters, and even the first incarnation of the Drifters. It's a fair evaluation to say their sound was rawer than the sounds that really reached out across racial barriers, from acts less likely to be inducted such as the Five Satins, the Harptones, and even the Five Keys.
However, there is also sufficient cause to say they should have been a Performer inductee, namely that they were nominated twice for that honor in the past. As with Elmore James, we are left asking why they were Performer then and an Early Influence now. Even worse, vocal R&B, aka doo-wop, is that territory that most music historians would also recognize as rock and roll at its most basic and earliest. So now you're breaking up a stone that is critical to the foundation of rock and roll. Is it really smart to go down that road? How will they handle this in the future? It's all but certain that if the Clovers are ever inducted, it will also be as an Early Influence. But what about acts like the aforementioned Five Keys, Five Satins, and Harptones? Some would argue that I'm putting the cart way before the horse, as it is unlikely those acts will ever be nominated, let alone inducted; however, not only have all three been Previously Considered, it's an important question to ask because the slope is already getting a little slippery to keep credibility intact (and even then some would say that ship has sailed). They've already hammered at other stones, like rockabilly with Wanda Jackson. What if they decide they owe something to lesser-known-but-still-important '50s guitar hero and rock outfit Buddy Knox And The Rhythm Orchids? What if they want to induct Chubby Checker as an Early Influence because he was an early precursor to EDM? Or Lesley Gore for being an original standout figure that paved the way for "riot grrls" like Joan Jett?
This is why I oppose fellow monitors who suggest the "movable timeline," that Early Influence is best applied to those who predate, but helped laid the groundwork for major patches of musical mini-epochs. By that logic, the MC5 are a prime candidate for Early Influence induction for predating, but heavily influencing punk. It's ridiculous: rock 'n' roll music is constantly evolving, and everything that is current is potentially significant in its pre-dating of something to come. That doesn't make what we have now, "not rock." And that's the latent effect you're ultimately having when you call a musician or group "Early Influence" instead of "Performer." You are decidedly declaring it as "not rock 'n' roll." I've already dealt with people in real life who think that REAL rock 'n' roll didn't exist until the Beatles came along or until Bob Dylan plugged in, or think that if it ain't hard or metal, it ain't rock. And every once in awhile some chucklehead will spew ignorance stating that soul, reggae, and rap have nothing to do with rock 'n' roll.
This is why I can only be marginally happy for the "5" Royales when they get inducted as an Early Influence, instead of Performer. Or Wanda Jackson. Or Freddie King. (Or Ringo Starr as AME, but that was last entry.) When you get an award, it's supposed to mean something. But when you play the game the way the Hall is doing it now, it becomes less meaningful. Its integrity is compromised. It's why I'm infuriated when the inductees or surviving family members (and fellow non-affiliated fans and even fellow Monitors) are so gracious about induction. It pains me to know that they're not getting their full or proper due. I'm told I should just be thankful that they ARE getting official recognition in some capacity. But I'm not. I can't be. Earning the award you're given within its proper parameters is rewarding. This is a pity induction, and it shouldn't happen this way. Do it right, or don't do it at all.
I won't go so far as to say the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame Foundation owes it to us to get it right. No, but they DO owe it to the inductees, the inductees' surviving families and loved ones, history itself, and even to themselves, for their own credibility's sake. Having rabid fans howl about their favorite acts getting snubbed is one matter. They're like the fans at a football stadium cheering their favorite teams. By claiming to have guidelines and categorizations for inductees, the Foundation sets themselves up as refs, so to speak. And I won't even go into the mess you get when, by that analogy, Jann S. Wenner is posturing himself as rock 'n' roll's Roger Goodell. Nope, not gonna go there. I'll let Tom Lane do that. The point is, we as fans hate bad calls, and that the Foundation owes it to the players (of instruments, including voice) to make the correct calls, for the good of the game (music history). When they can't do that right, the whole league suffers, especially when a quick peek at Future Rock Legends' Revisited & Projected project shows a plethora of worthy candidates for Early Influences still not inducted into the actual Hall, including but not limited to Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Ella Fitzgerald, the Mills Brothers, the Carter Family, Blind Lemon Jefferson, and the Four Freshmen.
So let's make a point to be more consistent, shall we? Maybe a rule that says once they've been nominated for Performer, they can never be inducted as an Early Influence? That sounds like a pretty reasonable idea to me. As is, the Rock Hall loses esteem for every year they continue to make the distinctions even blurrier.
And to quote Robin Thicke, I hate these blurred lines.
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Anything worth doing is worth doing ri--oh, nevermind
After a hectic holiday season, I now finally have time to
sit down and post more fully my thoughts on our Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame
Class Of 2015. I fleshed out a few
comments on the Future Rock Legends site, and I will be quoting my entries
there. Also, while I’m not prone to
ranting, it is accurate to say that this is one dissatisfied customer.
First, the Performer inductees. Let’s face it, everyone knew and predicted Green Day to
make it. Hardly the most deserving, but
hardly the least either. So, we can
just shrug our shoulders and say, “No surprises there.” Pretty much the same deal with Lou Reed,
whose death cemented his spot in the Hall for the second time. Things are bit happier with Stevie Ray
Vaughan And Double Trouble both in the fact that Stevie’s FINALLY getting
his just due, and that they are indeed including his band with him. I’m thrilled about this one. This band has been the biggest omission from
the Hall, in my opinion, ever since they became eligible. Bill Withers is a name that kind of
sneaked up on me. When his name was
first bandied about, I was rather surprised.
I don’t dislike his music, but I’m not a huge fan either. That’s still my feeling on his music. However, ever since his name first appeared
on the nominees list, there was a murmuring within that he would make the
cut. So I predicted him, as well. Four for six on my predictions. Originally, I was planning on predicting Joan
Jett And The Blackhearts due to Jett’s appearance in last year’s
ceremonies, but thought Sting would be much more likely. She and her band are pretty low in my
opinion (and several others’ as well) as far as deserving the honors, but I
love “School Days”, “You Drive Me Wild”, “Fake Friends”, “Androgynous”, and of
course, “I Love Rock N’ Roll” and “I Hate Myself For Loving You”. But I have to point out, how deserving is
someone if they do a cover of “Love Is All Around”? And just to clarify, I don’t mean the proto-monster ballad from
the Troggs, I mean the theme song from The Mary Tyler Moore Show. That’s right. Well, Joan, you’re going to make it after all… into the
Hall. Congratulations. Lastly, The Paul Butterfield Blues Band,
a band we knew was going to keep being nominated until they made it, had Jann
S. Wenner’s support, but no one thought was anywhere near the most deserving,
and few listed them among their favorites.
Well, there’s often one of those.
Not always, but often enough to the point where it’s fruitless to be
sour about it.
But it’s not the Performers that made everyone sit up and
take notice. It was the other two
inductees in this year’s class. The
less discussed of the two is the selection of The “5” Royales as Early
Influence inductees. Fellow Monitor Tom
Lane posted his enthusiasm and willingly accepts this inductee. But I must resoundingly disagree. For reasons I hope to get into in another
entry, I’m going to call this one a bad call.
But the bulk of the ire centers on the induction of Ringo
Starr in the “Award For Musical Excellence” category. The question everyone is asking, but for
different reasons, is “Why?” For some,
it’s “Why even bother?”, for others, it’s “Why in this category and not
nominated as a Performer down the road?”
This is the camp I fall squarely in.
I still feel very strongly that Ringo Starr is (note the present tense)
worthy of induction as a Performer.
Another commenter on the FRL site, fellow Monitor Dezmond, essentially
said that if Ringo were never in the Beatles, no one would be clamoring for his
induction. It’s an interesting hypothetical
to postulate; however, it’s still one that I must disagree with. Partially because I also still support the
induction for artists like Gary U.S. Bonds, Freddy Cannon, Bobby Rydell, Tommy
James And The Shondells, and the Turtles, to name a few. But also because Ringo’s music just makes
the grade. At this point, I’d like to
copy and paste two posts of mine from FRL that further expound my feelings
about Ringo’s music.
“I do think Ringo deserves solo induction as a Performer.
His 70's output were some of the most joyful, ebullient, rocking, rollicking,
fun, and human records from that entire decade. Did it always push the
envelope? No, but sometimes I think that doing so is overrated. He is just
plain good rock'n'roll, and that should be honored for what it is. And with
Joan Jett getting in this year, the ‘fun but safe’ slot would have been wide
open for him. But hey, congrats on him being the first person inducted in two
different categories. Maybe this will lead to a solo Carole King induction now.”
And…
“Ringo Starr's solo career is still very much worthy. I
stand by everything I said about his music in my previous post. In fact, the
only detriment to the argument is that more artists haven't followed his lead.
His solo music is generally the kind of joyful and life-affirming that the
music world is dying of thirst for, amidst a salt-water ocean of lyrics of
angst and abstract, and angry distortion pedals and intentional cacophony. We
get that fresh water in small doses of fun like "Party Hard,"
"Girlfriend," and even the lesser "This Afternoon."
Ringo's music is real to me. More real than Green Day, supposedly the voice of my generation. The medicinal effect of music as expressed through ‘Oh My My’ and ‘A Dose Of Rock And Roll’, the yearning for a stranger in ‘Devil Woman’, the fatigue expressed in ‘You And Me’, the empathy regarding bad days in ‘Hopeless,’ the eagerness for Christmas day in ‘Come On Christmas,’ etc. In fact, one of the greatest quotes about the futility of regret, imo, comes from the Ringo Starr song, ‘Weight Of The World’: It all comes down to who you crucify/You either kiss the future or the past goodbye. It's a kind of realism that is excellent because it is common love and common sense and reaches everyone.
Ringo's music as a solo artist is very deserving.”
Ringo's music is real to me. More real than Green Day, supposedly the voice of my generation. The medicinal effect of music as expressed through ‘Oh My My’ and ‘A Dose Of Rock And Roll’, the yearning for a stranger in ‘Devil Woman’, the fatigue expressed in ‘You And Me’, the empathy regarding bad days in ‘Hopeless,’ the eagerness for Christmas day in ‘Come On Christmas,’ etc. In fact, one of the greatest quotes about the futility of regret, imo, comes from the Ringo Starr song, ‘Weight Of The World’: It all comes down to who you crucify/You either kiss the future or the past goodbye. It's a kind of realism that is excellent because it is common love and common sense and reaches everyone.
Ringo's music as a solo artist is very deserving.”
Regarding the last sentence of the previous full paragraph,
I would also remind the reader of what I said in my merits’ rankings of the
nominees, in favor of Bill Withers under Intangibles:
“Idealists will describe rock and roll music as a musical
genre that at its finest, breaks down borders, shatters barriers, bridges the
widest chasms, and unifies people on a fundamental level that is indisputably
and universally human. If ‘Lean On Me’ doesn’t fit the bill here, what
song does? In this regard, ‘Lean On Me’ belongs in the same discussion as
‘Blowin’ In The Wind’ and ‘All You Need Is Love.’ More than any nominee
on this ballot, Bill Withers reached this ideal with at least one of his
songs.”
While no single song by Ringo Starr as a soloist attained
this goal quite the way “Lean On Me” does, this is the very essence of what
Ringo Starr’s solo music is about: singing about the places where we’ve all
been. The late Dick Clark listed this
as one of the things that made Ray Charles such a genius. It’s part of why we venerate Smokey Robinson
as a songwriter, and it’s why Ringo’s music is unquestionably excellent. And quite honestly, we could use a few more
artists whose credentials are simply that, fuck the holy twins of innovation of
influence.
But hey, the category is called “Award For Musical
Excellence”, right? Shouldn’t I be
jubilant about it then? And the answer
is still no. It’s still no because we
still haven’t gotten any real good explanation about this category. There are still those who imagine this
category as a simple renaming of the Sideman category, much as the
Non-Performer category was re-dubbed the “Ahmet Ertegun Award”. Well,
Ringo did do some session work in the ‘70s, mainly for his friends, but
honestly, a sideman? No. Just no.
Besides which, what about the three engineers from 2012, or the E Street
Band who weren’t studio musicians for hire, but a coherent unit that worked and
traveled together with Bruce Springsteen?
It’s a haze that is very uncomfortable on its own, but with Ringo Starr
this year, it’s even more so.
How about a renaming of “Lifetime Achievement”? Okay…but again, really? “Lifetime Achievement” inductees, pre-2004
at least, were used to mark a higher esteem for those inductees than would
normally befit an inductee for that category, which in this case was entirely
Non-Performers. Does the E Street Band
deserve higher esteem than the Boss? And
as much as I love Ringo’s work as a soloist, he isn’t as deserving as Lennon,
McCartney, or Harrison as soloists, or the Beatles as a whole, though still
more deserving than maybe a third of the names we had on this year’s
ballot. So that answer doesn’t satisfy
either.
The galling alternative conclusion is that
the “Award For Musical Excellence” category is (becoming) the “Because we
fucking say so, that’s why, dammit!” category.
And if that’s the case, then why have categories, or even a ballot at
all? It is also not a good answer, but
it’s much more probable than the other two.
And in hindsight, it may even appear that Sting was the guinea pig this
year. If they couldn’t get Sting in
this year as a Performer, then the outcome wouldn’t have been good for Ringo
Starr either.
Back in 2011, when the Small Faces/Faces joint nomination
got everyone tittering, I emailed one of the NomCom members for some
explanation as to why they were nominated jointly and not separately. This member replied saying two things about
it. The second thing said was this: “I
always think of the Faces as two bands with a continuous history somehow--that
is, I always think of the Faces as Mac, Ronnie, and Kenney working
with...whomever they work with.” A
reply, no doubt to send into a tizzy those who feel Steve Marriott was the
end-all be-all of British music. But
even more telling was what this member said first about it: “What do you figure
the odds are that, having chosen one group or the other, we would succeed in
getting both in within the lifetime of the currently living band members. I
know my estimation of that likelihood.”
Don’t get me wrong, I’ll take my honors while living over posthumously
any day, but when I read that then, I wanted to immediately reply, “Let me ask
you in return, which is important: inducting them while they are still alive,
or inducting them correctly?” Keep in
mind, that at that time, I still believed that the joint nomination was
justifiable. (To some degree, I still
do, but not the way the Hall went about doing it and justifying it.) Clearly, the NomCom knew which they felt was
more important, and still seems to believe, apparently.
And unfortunately, this is the angle people by and large
will take anyway. In his Twitter feed,
Ringo Starr himself has said nothing negative about his being inducted in this
manner, only that he’s grateful it happened.
The kin of the members the “5” Royales don’t care that the Foundation is
playing fast and loose with historical benchmarks and definitions. They’re just glad their loved ones’ legacies
are honored in some capacity. Ringo and the loved ones of the "5" Royales are happy, so in the eyes of all the higher-ups at the Foundation, people
like me who are not directly affected by this but are still upset are in the
same league as comic book devotees who throw a tantrum over having a black Nick
Fury in Marvel’s The Avengers, minus the accusations of racism.
To which, I say, “Up yours.” In the various jobs I’ve had over the years, I’ve repeatedly
encountered corporate buzz talk designed to motivate workers to follow
procedures to the letter, no matter how ridiculous. Among those, one currently stands out as a sentiment I wish to
impress upon the people at the Foundation—if you don’t have time to do it
right, when will you find time to do it over/again? The seeming string of inconsistencies may be partly due to the
change in memberships in power positions, but the duty to be consistent is
mandatory, no matter the entity. Change
can, will, and should happen, but core concepts should remain immutable.
In my opinion, this class has eight outstanding Performer
inductees, and no inductees in any other category (side note: shame on you for
passing on Bob Crewe again). But that’s
not gonna change anything. All I can
say is, if getting them in while alive if possible is of that paramount importance,
why are the classes so small? This is
the first year in a long time that we actually have fewer past nominees still
not inducted—but ONLY because they chose to call the “5” Royales “Early
Influences”. Otherwise, we’d still have
the same number, and most years, that list keeps growing, but not as rapidly as
the list of worthy candidates that haven’t even been nominated. I’m not a politician, and we’re not talking
about education here. Bigger class
sizes are a good thing; they will go a long way in solving these problems. Don’t worry about the television special when you’re in that room
setting confines. You can cross that
bridge when you get to it. For now,
just focus on doing it right. This is not
doing it right.
Thursday, December 4, 2014
Official Predictions For 2015
After much procrastinating, it is now time to post
predictions, seed the nominees, and prepare to be drastically wrong. Without further ado, my predictions for the
Class Of 2015.
1. Green Day
Pop-punk band largely popular in the 1990s and early
2000s. Newly eligible.
Why they might make it: They were one of the three
major names that helped alternative break through the glass ceiling, all while
also enjoying a run of commercial success.
Additionally, they are well-connected with the powers-that-be at the
Foundation, and pretty much everyone agrees they are going to get in.
Why they might not: Despite the general consensus
that they’re going to get in, there isn’t nearly the same consensus that
they’re among the most deserving acts on the ballot. If this feeling is widespread to enough members of the voting
bloc, they might not make it. Also,
detractors of their music feel they can sum up Green Day’s entire ethos with
the opening line from “Basket Case”: “Do you have the time to listen to me
whine?” For naysayers, Green Day is the
music of spoiled, privileged millenials who don’t know what real hardships are.
Whom they’d pave the way for: Pearl Jam is on deck
next year, and they’re just as assured of getting in as Green Day seems to be
at first glance.
Biggest threats: Nine Inch Nails is a huge threat to
their chances, as is guitar driven blues outfit Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double
Trouble, with the Smiths in the mix as well.
In the end: Trust the connections. Green Day has been there for the Hall a time
or two, now the Hall’s going to be there for them. Induction chances: 80%
2. Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble
Blues-rock outfit from the 80’s. First time nominee.
Why they might make it: Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double
Trouble has been one of the biggest names touted as criminal omissions from the
Hall ever since they became eligible for the Class Of 2008. Music lovers have been chomping at the bit
to see these guys nominated. At
present, they rule the roost on the fan ballot, and as fellow monitor Donnie
and others (including myself) have noted, ever since the implementation of the
fan ballot, whoever tops the fan ballot has gotten inducted. Not necessarily causation, but it really is
eyebrow-raising correlation at present.
Why they might not: Initially, it was just Vaughan
nominated, and Double Trouble was added later.
There might still be some confusion on this matter, and that could
hurt. Also, a hefty part of their
catalog consisted of covers.
Whom they’d pave the way for: There are still a few
blues-rock pioneers and blues greats still waiting in the wings. Anyone ranging from Johnny Winter to Junior
Wells could pass through the gate that Vaughan and company could open up.
Biggest threats: The Paul Butterfield Blues Band are
the most direct competition, but modern guitar acts like Green Day and Nine
Inch Nails might also be a factor.
In the end: As Chuck D reminded us, the blues gave
birth to rock and roll, but rock and roll, and especially acts like Stevie Ray
Vaughan And Double Trouble is why the world gave a damn about the blues
again. This should prove impossible to
ignore. Induction chances: 75%
3. N.W.A.
Pioneer gangsta rap group.
Third time nominee, seeded #5 for 2013 and #9 for 2014.
Why they might make it: They’re pioneers. Straight Outta Compton is a landmark rap
album, and their subsequent albums, though few, were also hugely
successful. They were pioneers of
gangsta rap, which almost completely obsolesced the older style hip-hop of the
original hip-hop pioneers, as gangsta became synonymous with rap for a good
portion of the ‘90s. Also, as the
launching point for the solo careers of Dr. Dre, Ice Cube, Eazy-E, and even MC
Ren, and Yella, they could be considered rap’s first supergroup, or at the very
least, the rap equivalent of the Yardbirds.
Why they might not:
Quick, ask someone who hates rap (or at least did in the ‘90s) why they
hate(d) rap. That laundry list that is
their answer? Most of that traces
clearly back to N.W.A. Even if they
didn’t pioneer some of those aspects themselves, they did combine it all into a
blend that is the main exhibit for hatred of rap: self-gratifying, gratuitous
and prolific profanity; incredibly subversive lyrics that went beyond mere
wake-up calls of socially conscious folk and rock, eschewing civil
disobedience, opting instead for and glorifying bloody violence;
self-aggrandizement that made “cockiness” look like “self-confidence”; plus the
usual stock answers of how rap isn’t even music since what they’re doing
doesn’t constitute singing. And you
don’t even have to be a stereotypical stuffy, White, conservative Christian to
find that combination disturbing, or at the very least, inartistic.
Whom they’d pave the way for: The big ones are 2Pac
and the Notorious B.I.G., the martyrs and symbols of rap-gang warfare, but also
rappers like Ice-T and Snoop Doggy Dogg, plus the solo careers of most of the
members of N.W.A. themselves.
Biggest threats: There’s no other rap group on the
ballot this time, so no direct threats, but the funk of War might take away
from them.
In the end:
N.W.A. has been flying under the radar of most of the discussion this
year. Part of that has been due to
omissions from the ballot, some of that has been arguing about ballot
divisions. But a lot of that has been
people figuring without another rap act on the ballot, their chances are pretty
good. I’m inclined to agree. Induction chances: 70%
4. Bill Withers
Soul singer/songwriter.
First-time nominee.
Why he might make it: The Hall loves
singer/songwriters, and Withers fits the bill.
He’s clearly the pick of Nominating Committee member ?uestlove, and new
members tend to get names in during their first couple years. Lastly, Withers’ songs “Lean On Me” and
“Ain’t No Sunshine” are two songs that have the stood the test of time the best
out of possibly the collective catalog of the entire ballot (save, possibly,
for the heavily sampled “Good Times” by Chic).
Why he might not: As mentioned in the initial reaction to the ballot, Withers isn't the kind of performer one immediately thinks of when the term "singer/songwriter" is bandied about. Coupled with the fact that the Rock Hall has been rocky in its history of inducting soul music over the past decade, this adds an additional hurdle for Withers to clear. To top it all off, Withers himself hasn't appeared to be all that excited about the prospect being inducted, and the Rock Hall generally prefers to induct those who want to be inducted.
Whom he’d pave the way for: Four-time flop Joe Tex
may get another reconsideration if Withers can get in. It may also help other soul greats like
Billy Preston, Barry White, or Johnnie Taylor finally get recognized as well.
Biggest threats: War is every bit as funky as Withers
and more beloved by the classic rock crowd.
Chic is the R&B pet project for the NomCom, and for soul, the
Spinners are another, more commercially successful contender.
In the end: Admittedly, I was not on board with the
bandwagon that thought Withers would get nominated. Bill Withers hasn’t always gotten my vote on the fan ballot, but
he may be able to quietly sneak through.
Induction chances: 60%
5. Lou Reed
Singer/songwriter, former lead singer of the Velvet
Underground. Third nomination,
previously unseeded.
Why he might make it: Lou Reed is a figure that is
widely respected as an artist and innovator.
His songs have been covered in a variety of venues, he’s been called the
“godfather of punk,” the reverence for the Velvet Underground could be a
factor, and the fact he died this past year could all serve to finally push him
through.
Why he might not: How many solo Lou Reed songs can
you name, not including his work with the Velvet Underground or live solo
performances of same? His legacy rather
outshines his actual solo discography, and that’s a problem for an institution
about unquestionable musical excellence.
Whom he’d pave the way for: This one’s almost a
complete zilch, as Lou Reed was such a singular performer, that there’re few
who could be called his ilk, and of those who’ve not yet been inducted, Warren Zevon
may be the most likely candidate.
Biggest threats: Sting is his biggest threat, as he
would also be a double inductee, and there might not be two of those. For singer/songwriters, Bill Withers is the
biggest obstacle.
In the end: The death fairy can indeed be kind to
those whom the Hall loves. In this
case, I think the love will be there for Lou’s posthumous solo inclusion. Induction chances: 55%
6. Sting
80’s solo artist, former leader of the Police. First time nominee.
Why he might make it: Some of the power players at
the Foundation are almost more interested in landing the big names to draw
visitors to the museum in Cleveland than they are about the music, and Sting’s
the biggest single name on this ballot.
His commercial success track record is pretty solid to boot.
Why he might not: There’s a pretty wide consensus
among those who follow the Hall that Sting is nowhere near the most deserving….
In fact, he ranks dead last with a few people, including me. Additionally, he may have had a lot of hits,
but his biggest success has been in the Adult Contemporary charts, which is
borderline anathema to the Hall.
Whom he’d pave the way for: A former band member with
strong name recognition to be inducted for a solo career that many don’t feel
is worthy? As much as I feel he’s
worthy, Ringo Starr seems to be the obvious punchline for that one.
Biggest threats: Lou Reed is a strong threat for the
doubly-inducted honor this year. Green
Day is the other candidate that lists very strongly for both hit singles and
albums.
In the end: I originally wrote him off, and I really
still want to, but in my previous blog about trends, Sting rated highly in the
three currently prominent trends of being latter day, commercially successful,
and serious name recognition. That
makes it very likely that he can overcome his weaknesses of being a solo soft
rocker. Well, maybe not so much “very
likely” as “equally likely.” Induction
chances: 50%
7. Chic
R&B/disco group fronted by a crackerjack production
team. This is their ninth appearance on
the ballot, not seeded their first two times, seeded dead last (#9) in 2007, #7
in 2008, #5 in 2010, #10 in 2011, #12 in 2013, and #2 in 2014.
Why they might make it: After last year’s
disappointment, Nile Rodgers has been working hard to press the flesh and work
the social media to get his case for his group more widely known. Musically, their records were sampled far
and wide back in the early days of hip-hop, so the influence factor is definitely
in their favor. From a musical
standpoint, their bass and guitar lines are considered very tough to imitate or
duplicate. The men in the group were all production geniuses. Also, Nile Rodgers was on the Nominating
Committee back when the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame was first founded, so
politically, this an attempt to repay the favor to him. .
Why they might not: As Chandler Bing might say, could
the stars have aligned any harder for Chic than they did last year? Last year was the most golden opportunity,
the highest tide for Chic’s hopes for induction. Daft Punk cleaned up at the Grammys thanks to Nile Rodgers
handiwork on “Get Lucky.” Additionally,
there’s still the Chic Syndrome: solid instrumentation soured by laughable
lyrics. Lastly, as has been the case in the past, disco isn’t popular with the
voting bloc, or so it seems.
Whom they’d pave the way for: The love for Nile
Rodgers won’t readily translate to love for disco. The biggest likelihood is that the next two artists in the queue
for those with most nominations but not in will probably be revisited, which
means Joe Tex, and maybe even Chuck Willis.
Biggest threats: Chic has unexpectedly high
competition on the ballot this year.
The Spinners as an R&B group have more popularity, as do fellow
funksters War and Bill Withers.
In the end: The NomCom wants Nile in, and will get
them in at some point. Their direct
competition is the stiffest that it’s been in awhile. But with so many nominations, it’s a matter of time, making them
this year’s upset special. Induction
chances: 49%
8. Joan Jett And The Blackhearts
Harder-rock-but-not-quite-metal band from the ‘80s. Third-time nominee, seeded #13 in 2012 and
dead last (#15) in 2013.
Why they might make it: The biggest reason is probably Jett’s leading the tribute to
Nirvana at this past year’s ceremonies (“Hervana”, as Krist Novoselic called
it), singing lead on “Smells Like Teen Spirit.” Plus, they’re good time, fun rock and roll, and who doesn’t
appreciate that? And when an artist has
an anthemic rock and roll song, the artist has a tendency to get recognized,
and if they have a few hits aside of that, so much the better.
Why they might not: They made very little waves besides their one major hit, “I Love
Rock ‘N Roll”, and what they did have was largely covers (including said major
hit). The Hall Of Fame usually prefers
to honor originality. Also, if you
didn’t see Hervana live, but saw it on YouTube or HBO, Jett’s performance
looked and sounded awful, even worse than her tribute to the Dave Clark Five in
2008.
Whom they’d pave the way for: As well as the obvious Pat Benatar, they
might also clear the path for more classic rock acts with just a few, but
well-remembered songs. Maybe Thin Lizzy
or Blue Oyster Cult? And it’s way too
soon, but Jett may quite be the precedent for a future induction of P!nk. Or even Jett’s previous band, the Runaways.
Their biggest threats: Green Day, Stevie Ray Vaughan
And Double Trouble, and Nine Inch Nails are all powerful rock acts that could
split the ballot against Jett & Co.
In the end:
When, like last year, the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame fails to induct a
Black artist, accusations of institutional racism fly. This year, we’re gonna hear all about the
misogyny. Induction chances: 45%
9. Nine Inch Nails
One-man, industrial rock group. Newly eligible.
Why he/they might make it: Nine Inch Nails is the act
that really helped bring industrial music to a wider audience, which means a
lot with the Hall. In fact, the act
made Rolling Stone magazine’s list of Immortals, which practically guarantees
eventual induction.
Why he/they might not: Industrial may have been brought to the mainstream, but it has
never been fully embraced, not to the degree that grunge, rap, and alternative
have been. Its intentional cacophony
makes it a difficult style to want to honor and enshrine. This may be a problem.
Whom he/they would pave the way for: I’m not very
knowledgeable of my industrial, so I have no clue. If the members of Filter aren’t included with Trent Reznor, maybe
the doors would be opened for them.
Biggest threats: Fellow newly eligible Green Day is
their biggest roadblock, while Stevie Ray Vaughan and Joan Jett And The
Blackhearts are also threats against Nine Inch Nails.
In the end: People are watching curiously to see if
they pull off the upset and keep Green Day out, but I’m just not seeing
it. They’ll have to wait until 2017,
because the Hall will be too busy inducting Pearl Jam for 2016. Induction chances: 40%
10. The Spinners
Superstar Philly-soul vocal group from Detroit, Michigan. Second-time nominee, seeded #3 in 2012.
Why they might make it: The Hall has been strongly
populist in the past couple years, and the Spinners are the biggest singles act
on this ballot.
Why they might not: Soul music, soul groups
especially, have been very sporadic in their induction in the past decade. It’s a disturbing trend that will hopefully
be reversed soon, but for now, it’s bad news.
Whom they’d pave the way for: Classic soul is getting
thinner and thinner, so maybe they’ll go for the few-hit, but highly-respected
soul outfit Harold Melvin And The Bluenotes, or just lead singer Teddy
Pendergrass. Lou Rawls is another
possibility. Or they may go back to New
Orleans and go for the Neville Brothers..
Though still a couple years away, a Spinners induction could point to
the possibility of Boyz II Men getting in eventually, as well. And let’s add Billy Preston.
Biggest threats: Bill Withers is favored for soul,
Chic is a wild card among ‘70s groups, War is another ‘70s group that may
hamper things, and for classic vocal groups, the Marvlettes may also detract
from the Spinners.
In the end: I
refused to get my hopes up on their nomination, but they made it onto the
ballot. This time, however, my refusal
to hope is pretty well founded, I think.
Induction chances: 35%
11. The Marvlettes
R&B girl group that gave the Motown empire its first
number one hit single on the Hot 100.
Second-time nominee, seeded #6 in 2013.
Why they might make it: Anything Motown has a serious
shot. The Hall loves Motown, and really
helping make Motown a household name is strong credibility. Plus, in the history of the Hall, only two
years were without a strong presence of the ‘60s. The Marvelettes would be the best candidate for this slot.
Why they might not: The Hall loves Motown, but they
sure can take their sweet time showing it: Marvin Gaye, Smokey Robinson, and
the Four Tops all needed two nominations to get in, the Supremes and Martha And
The Vandellas both needed three, the Jackson Five came up four times before getting
in, Gladys Knight And The Pips took five, the Miracles needed a special
subcommittee to convene and break precedent to get them in, not to mention
twice nominated but still not inducted Mary Wells! Only the Temptations and Stevie Wonder got in on their first
nominations, both in 1989. (Also the
Isley Brothers and solo Michael Jackson, but both of whom are much better known
for their post-Motown work) Plus girl
groups also generally need a few nominations to get in, 2005 inductees the
Ronettes the lone exception. Lastly,
despite having a solid string of hits in the Top 40, they tend to be summed up
with their major hit, “Please Mr. Postman”.
Whom they’d pave the way for: Getting the Marvelettes
in might get the NomCom looking at Motown again, where we have Junior Walker
And The All-Stars and Mary Wells as the last two major ‘60s acts for the
family, plus a peek into the ‘70s shows the Commodores, solo Lionel Richie, and
possibly even solo Diana Ross. They also
might lead the way for other girl groups like the Chantels, Crystals,
Shangri-Las, even the Chiffons to get some consideration.
Biggest threats: The Spinners are the biggest direct
threat, and the Paul Butterfield Blues Band are a fellow ‘60s act that stand in
the way.
In the end: I’d love a class with Stevie Ray Vaughan
And Double Trouble, the Spinners, and the Marvelettes in it, but it’s too lofty
a goal to ever happen. We’ll be lucky
if we get one of those three, and the Marvlettes are the least likely of the
three. Induction chances: 33.3%
12. War
Latin-funk band from the ‘70s. Third-time nominee, seeded #7 in 2009 and
#12 in 2012.
Why they might make it: Cool
funk. Memorable classics like "Low Rider," "The Cisco Kid,"
and "Why Can't We Be Friends" are all pleasers that make them likely
candidates. Also, Eric Burdon would be
a multiple inductee, and the Hall loves to have multiple inductees.
Why they might not: Santana's already in. Can another Latin group make it? Also, innovation and influence are considered somewhat questionable. Plus, in comparison to other artists, and the politics of the Hall, they may just get lost in the shuffle.
Why they might not: Santana's already in. Can another Latin group make it? Also, innovation and influence are considered somewhat questionable. Plus, in comparison to other artists, and the politics of the Hall, they may just get lost in the shuffle.
Whom they’d pave the way for: The only Latin act that might garner some
attention following the induction of War would be Gloria Estefan/the Miami
Sound Machine, who are now eligible as well.
Classic rock acts with that indescribable, yet identifiable intangible
quality of coolness might benefit as well, and I’m thinking mainly Steppenwolf.
Biggest threats: Chic and Bill Withers are the most
direct threats, and the Spinners are a possible problem for War as well.
In the end: War is a band that a lot of people would
love to see get in, but it seems like for now, there’ll always be five or six
names that people will feel are more deserving or just prefer more, with War
getting lost in the shuffle. Seems like
it’ll be the case again this year.
We’ll see them on the ballot in three years again. Induction chances: 30%
13. Kraftwerk
European progressive act that pioneered electronica. Third
time nominee, unseeded their first time, seeded #9 in 2013.
Why they might make it: A truly innovative group,
they are partially responsible for a lot of electronica music today. Especially in the European club scene.
Why they might not: While the Hall Of Fame doesn’t discriminate
against acts from countries other than the US and UK, they do strongly favor
acts that were very popular in the U.S.A., which Kraftwerk was not. If a voting member isn’t too familiar with
their stuff, and sees five other names they like, they won’t bother researching
Kraftwerk further.
Whom they’d pave the way for: There’re a couple
avenues to go here. Fatboy Slim, Daft
Punk, and many more famous electronica acts are still a few years off. The Art Of Noise are a left-field
possibility, though possibly too much of a novelty act to get in. But Kraftwerk’s induction may help more acts
who were huge, just not in the States, get some recognition, such as Cliff
Richard And The Shadows, Status Quo, Johnny Hallyday, or Fela. Both paths are a bit of a stretch, but if
the road really dead-ended with Kraftwerk, they probably wouldn’t be worth
inducting anyway.
Biggest threats: As far as experimental goes, Lou
Reed is a bigger draw. For dance music,
it’s Chic.
In the end: Kraftwerk will probably need seven or
eight nominations before getting their proper recognition, much like the
Stooges or Black Sabbath. This is only
number three for them. Induction
chances: 25%
14. The Paul Butterfield Blues Band
Blues-rock band from the mid-‘60s. Fourth-time nominee, Unseeded the first time, seeded #14 each of
the past two years.
Why they might make it: They’re a formative
blues-rock act. Their sound is
considered to be a pioneer sound. A few
of its past members have some amount of fame to their own names. Also, they were name dropped by none other
than Jann S. Wenner as an act he’d like to see get in. If you don’t think that means something, you
don’t know the Hall.
Why they might not: They’re arguably the most obscure
name on this ballot, having no hit singles and no album making the top quarter
of the Billboard 200.
Whom they’d pave the way for: Like Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble,
this group could pave the way for blues acts to get in, like Junior Wells, Slim
Harpo, or even Albert Collins, if you want to go left field.
Biggest threats: Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double
Trouble are the obvious threat, and the Marvelettes are a more likely choice
from the ‘60s.
In the end: As much clout as Jann S. Wenner has, I
think he’ll have to continue to call this group an act he still wants to see
in, because it ain’t happening this time.
Induction chances: 20%
15. The Smiths
‘80s alternative rock group. First time nominee.
Why they might make it: The Smiths (and lead singer
Morissey) are a highly recognized and influential name in alternative music,
‘80s music, and ‘80s alternative music.
Additionally, as a soloist, Morrissey has a certain cache in a rather
niche market of Southwestern U.S. Latino teens.
Why they might not: ‘80s alternative just can’t catch
a break. The Cure couldn’t get in, the
Replacements couldn’t get in; despite Kim Gordon taking part in Hervana, Sonic
Youth couldn’t get on the ballot this time around.
Whom they’d pave the way for: Maybe Sonic Youth will
show up next year, maybe it’ll be the Pixies, or maybe they’ll retry the Cure
or the Replacements. Plus, Morrissey as
a soloist has a shot in the future.
Biggest threats: Green Day is the more likely
alternative rock act, Joan Jett And The Blackhearts are another ‘80s rock act
that could draw away votes, as well.
In the end: Until proven wrong, I’m just going to
keep assuming ‘80s alternative has little to no chance of getting in. I don’t know what would have to change to
turn that around, but I’m not holding my breath this time either. Induction chances: 10%
A bit later this year, but there you have it—my official
predictions for this year. It took a
bit of time to solidify them, but I think this is a solid guess. Not my ideal class, of course, but what I
feel is most likely. Hopefully we’ll
know in less than a month.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
What to look for in the 2015 nominees
When this past year’s inductees were announced, I did an
analysis about it overall, explaining why it was so hard to make good
picks. There were so many trends in
voting and it was impossible to satisfy all of them without a class of at least
nine Performer inductees, which of course did not happen. We face the same conundrum again this
year. A lot of factors one would expect
to coalesce a certain way can’t all coalesce together. In short, it’s time to explain why it’s
difficult for some of us to solidify our final predictions for this year.
The first big trend is that of the newly eligible
shoo-in. This year that definitely
seems to be Green Day… at first glance.
The truth is, what made Guns N’ Roses, Public Enemy, and Nirvana
shoo-ins were that they all finished strongly as highly deserving artists,
especially compared with the rest of their respective ballots. That surprisingly has not been the case this
year with Green Day. Everyone seems to
agree that Green Day is most likely going to get in this year, yet most people
don’t even rank Green Day among the top five deserving artists, though some
do. Most folks place Green Day
somewhere in the middle, or exactly in the middle as I did. Meanwhile, the also-newly-eligible underdog
that most feel has no chance of getting in this time has captured the fan vote
and is generally considered more deserving.
Could Nine Inch Nails pull off the upset? Or could the unthinkable happen and both make it? Unlikely, but that’s one trend we’re dealing
with.
Another one is that of recent death. This favors Lou Reed, as does the Hall’s
general enjoyment of having multiple-time inductees, which in addition to Lou
Reed also favors Sting, and maybe even War, depending on where they’ll fall on
the Eric Burdon issue. The blues
influence supports both the Paul Butterfield Blues Band and Stevie Ray Vaughan
And Double Trouble. The guitar god
trend supports Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble even more, but also to a
lesser extent Green Day, Nine Inch Nails, the Smiths, and Joan Jett And The
Blackhearts. We also see that since
Grandmaster Flash And The Furious Five got inducted, the Hall doesn’t let a dry
spell happen of three years without a rap inductee. That bodes well for N.W.A., as does the fact they’re the only rap
act on the ballot. And let’s not forget
the love of singer/songwriters, which is good news for Bill Withers, or Lou
Reed or Sting to a lesser extent. As
the Digital Dream Door site noted, the Hall also almost never goes a year
without a ‘60s act, which most strongly favors the Marvelettes, but also the
Paul Butterfield Blues Band and partially the Spinners (though they were more
prominent in the ‘70s).
So those are some trends that favor induction, but what
about those that don’t? For starters,
it has become increasingly difficult for any form of R&B that isn’t
guitar-driven to get in the Hall lately.
This is a problem for Bill Withers, the Marvelettes, the Spinners,
N.W.A., and most of all, Chic. Also bad
news for Chic is the struggle for any kind of dance or disco music to get
recognition, which also negatively affects Kraftwerk. 80’s alternative has been snubbed in the past with the Cure and
the Replacements getting shut out. The
Smiths’ chances don’t look as good when you consider that.
Probably the most important trends to look at, though, are
three that we’re seeing in the most recent years: the move to modern music, the
populist push, and the need for names.
The move to modern music most notably acknowledges the move away from
the ‘50s and ‘60s in recent years. The
‘70s, however, are still pretty en vogue with the Hall, though more so for 70’s
acts that stayed strong in the ‘80s.
The biggest benefactors of this trend would be Green Day, Nine Inch
Nails, N.W.A., the Smiths, Joan Jett And The Blackhearts, Stevie Ray Vaughan
And Double Trouble, and Sting.
The populist push, most closely tied to commercial success
and chart presence, was perhaps most prominent last year with Daryl Hall And
John Oates, KISS, and Linda Ronstadt all making the grade, those three names
being the top three names in commercial success for both singles and albums,
though the orders differed. The year
before that saw singles juggernaut Donna Summer, albums ultraheavyweight Rush,
and perfect mix between the two Heart all get in. If this trend continues, the smart money will be on the Spinners
for singles, War for albums, and possibly both Sting and Green Day as acts who
ride high in both columns.
Lastly, the need for names.
This one’s closely tied to the populist push, but doesn’t necessitate
sales. The Hall wants their museum
packed with tourists and their broadcasts to get big ratings, so big names are
needed. Sting is the clear frontrunner
on this one, Green Day, Lou Reed, and maybe also the Smiths trailing not too
far behind. Stevie Ray Vaughan And
Double Trouble will also have some clout in this category as well.
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Why we vote how we vote.
After having devised the pecking orders for the 2015
nominees, it stands to reason that we could accurately peg how one (in this
case I) would vote if given a ballot, or in their (my) contribution to the fan
ballot on the Rock Hall website.
On paper, it seems fairly simple: some hybrid of the merits
and tastes. And for the most part, it
does indeed work that way. Looking at my
lists of both merits and personal taste, I see that both the Smiths and Stevie
Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble make the top five in both categories. Naturally, both of those go on my
ballot. The Marvelettes just missed the
Top 5 on one and just made the Top 5 on the other, so they’d probably get my
vote as well. Despite being in the
bottom half of merit, they ran second in taste, so the Spinners have an average
that’s tied with the Marvelettes, and would get the vote from me as well. The fifth highest average of merit and
preference is N.W.A, who despite being in the bottom five for personal
enjoyment, are a solid second in terms of deserving induction. So, reasonably, I should be casting my ballot
for Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble, the Smiths, the Marvelettes, the
Spinners, and N.W.A.
Pretty simple, right?
And if that were the class that was inducted, I’d be pretty happy. I’d also shit bricks because there’s no way
this class is happening, but that’s for another entry. Just like probably everyone else who reads
this, I’ve submitted a fan ballot several times on the Rock Hall’s website, and
every time, four of those five names have indeed been checked off. However, instead of N.W.A. getting the fifth,
I’ve been waffling mostly between Bill Withers and War. Sometimes Bill Withers who finished sixth in
averages, and sometimes War, who despite being tied for ninth in averages, was
seventh in personal taste. Sometimes I
did vote for N.W.A., too, though. In
short, it seems that if I were a member of the voting bloc, it’s clear where
four of my votes would go, while the fifth would take some time to figure
out. And I gotta say that’s pretty
accurate. For me.
But I’m giving equal weight to personal preferences as to
merits. Others have a different weight
scale. Like my fiancé for example, who
admittedly is only doing this because I hamper her about it. Sorry honey.
Anyway, if she applied my logic and went with the averages of her taste
and how she feels they stack up objectively, her ballot would be cast for
Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble, Bill Withers, Green Day, the
Marvelettes, and Sting. Sixth place, by
the way, went to Joan Jett And The Blackhearts.
Yet, she’s not as attached to the artists on this ballot for personal
enjoyment, Green Day being the only one she really loves, with the top five
being filled out with Bill Withers, Sting, Joan Jett And The Blackhearts, and
Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble (sixth place: the Marvelettes). However, she’s admitted that when it comes to
actually casting a ballot, she’d stick strictly to her merits ranking. Her top five by her definitions of merits
sees it going Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble, the Smiths, the
Marvelettes, N.W.A., and Bill Withers, with Sting being the sixth optional
(don’t ask me, it’s her merits).
Similarly, consider the opinion of
PopeCharming/AlexVoltaire, whose Northumbrian blog was kind enough to plug mine
a few times, and for which, thank you.
His top six for merits were Kraftwerk, N.W.A., Green Day, Stevie Ray
Vaughan And Double Trouble, Nine Inch Nails, and Bill Withers. His personal preferences saw the top six
ranked as Bill Withers, the Spinners, Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble,
Sting, War, and Green Day. When you take
both ranks of all fifteen nominees, his top five are Stevie Ray Vaughan And
Double Trouble, Bill Withers, Kraftwerk, Green Day, and the Spinners, with a near
miss by War in sixth place. At the end
of that entry, where he said for whom he’d cast his vote, he did indeed choose
the first four, but instead of the Spinners for number five, he selected
N.W.A., stating that if he had a sixth and seventh choice, then he’d cast for
the Spinners and War (N.W.A. tied for seventh on his averages, tied with Chic).
Another perspective comes from Tom Lane, who didn’t rank
them by merits or taste per se, but simply put the nominees in a pecking order
by likelihood to vote for them. However,
reading his rationale behind each pecking point, it’s fairly clear that he was
swayed much more by personal taste than by whom he felt deserved the honors
more. His top five were the Spinners,
Chic, Stevie Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble, the Smiths, and War.
These are all important because as much as they might try to
deny it, members of the voting bloc are also humans and likewise afflicted by
the need to reconcile personal tastes with how seminal an artist really
is. And with some of them, artists
especially, personal relationships with the nominees are a factor too. It’s generally accepted by those of us on the
outside that the only reason Chic has ever been nominated is because of the ties
between Nile Rodgers and current NomCom members. Cronyism seems to be a big factor. Cronyism is also what is usually referred to
when nay-sayers claim that “it’s all political,” but what about literal
politics? Political activism that
resonates with the political beliefs of voters probably played a factor in the
decision to vote in people like Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne so quickly,
while differing politics may have been a factor in what kept an act like Alice
Cooper off the ballot for so long, and continues to keep others like Ted Nugent
or Pat Boone eternally out of the Hall.
Even if not on the politically opposite end of the spectrum, being a
neutral can be enough to rub them the wrong way, i.e. whoever’s not with us is
against us. It could even be a factor in
determining why Tom Morello from Rage Against The Machine is a NomCom member
and not Alice Cooper, nee Vincent Furnier, or Lars Ulrich. In all fairness, we laypeople aren’t entirely
immune from the influence of politics either, but we are less inclined to
consider it seriously as a factor when deciding who deserves enshrinement and
who doesn’t, possibly because we don’t get to anyway.
But for now we still have the fan ballot, and as
infinitesimal as our individual, repeatedly cast vote is to the total ballot
and the entire vote overall, it’s still something that we owe it to ourselves
to be conscientious of why we choose those that we do. It’ll also give our future gripes with the
Hall more credence among each other, but that’s just a fringe benefit. With the growth of the impact of grassroots
campaigns to get artists inducted, knowing ourselves first will help us more
effectively reach out to them.
In closing, I’m going to include the full list of my
fiancé’s lists, both merits and personal taste, since I put her through this
every year, it’s not fair to her to not publish her lists. Enjoy.
Her Merit Rank
- Stevie
Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble
- The
Smiths
- The
Marvelettes
- N.W.A.
- Bill
Withers
- Sting
- Green
Day
- Chic
- Nine
Inch Nails
- Lou
Reed
- Joan
Jett And The Blackhearts
- The
Spinners
- War
- Kraftwerk
- The Paul Butterfield Blues Band
Her Personal Taste Rank
- Green
Day
- Bill
Withers
- Sting
- Joan
Jett And The Blackhearts
- Stevie
Ray Vaughan And Double Trouble
- The
Marvelettes
- The
Spinners
- The
Paul Butterfield Blues Band
- Nine
Inch Nails
- Lou Reed
- War
- Chic
- N.W.A.
- Kraftwerk
- The
Smiths
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)