 "Photo: AP")
Recently, the nominees for the next induction into the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame were released. This year's nominees include Madonna, the Beastie Boys, Afrika Bambaataa and Donna Summer. It's the start that will eventually lead to speculation, hype, a giant VH1 program and discussion board flaming, to say the least. More importantly, there are many people still wondering: Why do we even care?
The most obvious red flag concerning the hall of fame is that you, the music consumer, do not have a say in the vote of who gets in. The committee that nominates the artists is comprised of the group's founder, Jann Wenner, as well as a panel of journalists, industry insiders and rock "experts." Who gets voted in is determined by the individual tastes of the panel, rather than the people who bought CDs, wore the T-shirts, waited in ticket lines and hung posters in their rooms. Also, the voting system is based on quantitative measures. A band is inducted if it receives at least 50 percent of the panel's votes. A band is up for nomination when its debut album came out at least 25 years ago. In result, there are some bands who meet the criteria to be inducted but are not because of the panel's biases.
Take, for example, the fact that Metallica is not nominated this year. They meet almost all of the requirements. In 2008, Kill 'em All, the band's debut, will celebrate its 25th anniversary. They have influenced many hard rock bands of today. And let's not forget: They sold a ton of records, especially compared to John Mellencamp. Of course, given that KISS and King Crimson have not been considered are still not in the Hall, the panelists don't give much thought to heavy metal and prog rock, both of which Metallica are heavily influenced by. They'd rather drink overpriced coffee and listen to James Taylor. Also keep in mind that the nominees are also selected to sell tickets for the dinner.
In this day and age, it's somewhat surprising the Hall even exists. Throughout the end of the 20th century and continuing today, we have seen a shift in power from the "expert" to the consumer. At one time, the only source for criticism was in the magazines, but Amazon.com's customer reviews gave more power to the consumer. Sites like YouTube, Digg and especially MySpace have allowed the consumer to become the critic. Who would you take advice from: someone in your community or a guy with an office in a skyscraper? Music criticism is still valid for engaging discussion, but do we really need the group of stuffy old folks dictating who's influential and who's not?
A final point: More and more artists don't care these days. Black Sabbath were content with not being nominated before they were finally inducted in 2006. The Sex Pistols refused to attend the ceremony when they were inducted. And I'm pretty sure Metallica's sales, as well as many other of the popular non-inducted bands, won't be affected, though I won't make any sordid jokes about their history.
- Andy O'Connor
The Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame was established in 1986 to celebrate and recognize those artists, both performing and non-performing, who exhibit a demonstrable influence and significance within the genre of rock 'n' roll. As such, we can recognize certain difficulties of its job right off the bat, which have since transformed into full-blown criticisms. These criticisms, well presented by my colleague Mr. O'Connor, can be essentially refuted in a statement. If you keep whining, I'll be forced to call the "waaambulance."
Firstly, of course the induction and nomination is done by committee, rather than popular vote. This is a museum which seeks to memorialize the most important figures of a given subject. Find me a museum where we elect the exhibits. If things worked like this, then the only exhibit in the Natural History Museum in D.C. would be The Bible.
On the same point, let's take a look at the social shift Mr. O'Connor points out, "from the 'expert' to the consumer." The most striking example of this is certainly YouTube. Now I'll be the first one to admit that YouTube is an incredible resource, especially if one tends toward procrastinating. But I will never concede that YouTube demonstrates anything more than short-term fads. Remember "Chocolate Rain," the No. 1 video of the summer? Neither do I.
Which brings me back to my basic point that the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame is organized around a specific goal - to avoid the short-term viewpoint. Hence the 25-year wait, the nominating panel of "experts," and the strict quantitative rules and by-laws.
Far from "drink[ing] overpriced coffee and listen[ing] to James Taylor," I sincerely believe that the committee behind the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame is doing their best to carry out an incredibly difficult job. And not only that, but they have succeeded in doing this job independent of the popular will - they seem to be actually considering the artists that have significance and influence, rather than popular artists simply imitating others.
I have faith that their failures, which are unavoidable, will likely be rectified within the next few years. Keep in mind that this organization is retrospective by nature, not just looking back a year or two, but a quarter of a century.
- Cass "Money" Luskin
Be the first to comment on this article!