What do you think?

[Tom Jrnyfn]

Awhile back I wrote a letter to the R&R Hall of fame questioning them on some of their nominees. I asked why the likes of the Beasty Boys were being nominated and not other bands.

I was surprised to get a letter back today from the President himself.



We define the music in it's broadest and most accurate fashion, tracing the roots back to Africa and evolving through field chants, ragtime, blues, jazz, race music, rhythm and blues, and finally the renaming of it all as "rock and roll." As such, there is a river of music that has changed and continues to do so.

The Induction process is outlined below. Those who feel that they know better are effectively saying that they are the experts, not Bruce, Ozzy, Chuck Berry, Dylan, Bonnie Raitt, etc...all are our Inductees who participate in the nominating and the voting. We respectfully disagree.

Nomination and induction into the Hall of Fame is not about popularity, records sales, which label the group is on, or anything other than the process below. The love for, the evaluation of, and the impact of any artist are subjective questions to be answered by the nominators and the voters. Unlike baseball, football, basketball or hockey, statistics are not relevant.


The entire nomination and induction process is coordinated by the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation in New York City. Artists can be inducted in four categories: Performer, Early Influence, Non-Performer and Side-Men. The latter three categories are evaluated and decided by separate committees.

The selection of Performers is a two-step process. The only formal criteria for the performance category is that an artist has to have had their first record 25 years ago. That said, candidates are reviewed and discussed relative to their impact on this music that we broadly call rock and roll. The innovation and influence of these artists is also critical. Gold records, number one hits, and million sellers are really not appropriate standards for evaluation.


The formal selection of Performers begins with an extensive panel of journalists, historians, previous inductees, noted musicians, industry heads, etc. In turn, those nominated are sent to a committee of more than 500 people around the world (journalists, historians, music industry management, all living inductees, musicians, etc.) who vote. Those receiving the highest number of votes and more than 50% of the votes cast are inducted into the Hall. Usually, this means five to seven new performing members each year. All this said, you can see the road to being inducted is an arduous one and for the most part, removed from the realm of influences or politics.

Finally, as I noted above, everyone personalizes everything about rock and roll, when they are brought into the circle of discussion. As such, the definition of "rock and roll," who is or was important, and who should be inducted is incredibly subjective. Everyone believes themselves to be the “expert”. Unfortunately, there are no longer any absolutes when it comes to candidates. The Chuck Berry, Elvis, Little Richard, Beatles days are gone. Going forward, the controversy will continue. Having said that, I believe that all worthy candidates will be inducted, just not always when they or their fans deem timely. In fact, there's not only precedent in our history, but also with the sports halls of fame where many great stars do not get inducted in the their first year of eligibility, or for many years to come in quite a few instances.


Peace & Soul,
Rock & Roll!



Terry Stewart
President
Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum

[mistiejourney]

So, I take that to mean that we (the fans) are merely responsible for "statistics", and those are not taken into consideration.

What an elitist attitude!

I know, it's only rock n' roll, but they can shove it.

It was nice to get a reply back, though!

[brywool]

The whole RRHOF is a stacked deck. They only admit the ones they like and not who sells the most or whatever. Just like Rolling Stone writes about who they like and ingnore others who sell or have sold a buttload of records. RRHOF is BS. Who cares? I hear so many people gripe about Journey or (insert band name here) not being in. It's nothing big at all.

[Enigma869]

I actually received an eerily similar response when I wrote the the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame a couple of years back. I posted the response I got back on Jackass Talk, back when I felt like BT was the Journey site! While it should certainly be obvious to everyone that there is going to be some subjectivity in ALL halls of fame, the entire thing shouldn't be based on one's "gut feeling". It cheapens the entire honor.

Tony Perez (Cincinatti Reds) is in the baseball HOF. Jim Rice (Red Sox) is not in the HOF. Rice played during the same era, and has better numbers than Perez in most categories. At least I can argue the merits of how if one guy is in, the other guy should clearly be in with the baseball HOF. With the Rock and Roll HOF, there is NOWHERE to even begin the debate, because there are no quantifiable standards that the Rock and Roll HOF will outline for anyone. They simply offer everyone their same "canned" response, when someone actually challenges the lunacy of their existence! They've really turned something that could have been AWESOME, for music fans, into something that's turned into a comedy of errors!


John from Boston

[Andrew]

All responses to RNRHOF are the same chain letter. Blah blah blah, your band is great but will never get in cause they don't suck our asses and pay us the $$$$ needed.

[Rockindeano]

suck our asses

Love that phrase. First Nebraska smack and now this.

Nice work dude.

[AR]

The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is full of hippie sinners who think Woodstock was judgement day.

He IS coming.

Save us.