| *goodco* 15.12.2010 14:18 |
Announcement link It's official -- Alice Cooper, Neil Diamond, Dr. John, Darlene Love and Tom Waits will be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame next year. The class of 2011 will be formally feted on Mar. 14 at New York's Waldorf Astoria Hotel. All but Waits were first-time nominees to the Hall. Acts who did not make the cut this year included first-time nominee Bon Jovi, as well as multiple nominees LL Cool J, Donna Summer, the Beastie Boys, J. Geils Band, Chuck Willis, Chic and Joe Tex. The nomination of shock rock icon Cooper and his original band seemed a long time coming given their commercial success -- four platinum albums and five Top 40 hits between 1971-73 -- and stature as theatrical pioneers. Cooper figures it's about time the band got into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. But he wasn't worried about it."I've always felt the same way about this whole thing," he tells Billboard.com. "I kind of sat back and said, 'It will happen eventually.' " "It did get to be kind of a joke, not being nominated," Cooper (born Vincent Furnier) adds. "I got to the point where I was saying, 'OK, I'm the Pete Rose of rock 'n' roll!' So now that it's a reality, it's a different take on it. Now I sit there and go, 'Wow. Wow! We've got to really get up and play, and assume the position of being in the Hall of Fame.' It'll be great." Cooper says the only time he was upset about not being on the ballot was in 2009, when Kiss, who he considers proteges of a sort, were nominated before him. "That one stung a little bit," he acknowledges. "I sat there and went, 'Now, wait a minute...Really? Are we invisible here, or what?' " The original Cooper band -- guitarists Michael Bruce and the late Glen Buxton, bassist Dennis Dunaway and drummer Neal Smith -- splintered in 1974, after the "Muscle of Love" album. But Cooper, who's continued as a solo act ever since, says he would not have accepted induction if it wasn't for the entire band. "The original band was cutting edge," he explains. "It was the original band that had all the iconic records from 'Love it to Death' on to 'Billion Dollar Babies' and 'Muscle of Love.' What I did after that was an aftermath. The original band were the guys that had to cut through that big, thick ice in order to become an entity out there. I can't see how I could just go up there as an individual." The four surviving Alice Cooper members are currently together in Arizona rehearsing for a performance at Cooper's 10th Annual Christmas Pudding at Phoenix's Comerica Theater, benefiting his Solid Rock Foundation for children. (Rob Zombie, former Eagles guitarist Don Felder, Night Ranger, Glen Campbell, Cheech Marin and Roger Clyne & the Peacemakers are also performing). The group will perform at the induction ceremony, with Steve Hunter, who played in Cooper's "Welcome to My Nightmare" band, filling in for Buxton. Major theatrics -- such as the guillotine or gallows -- are unlikely for the Hall of Fame ceremony, Cooper says, but it will hardly be a bare-bones performance. "We'll play 'I'm Eighteen' and 'School's Out,' probably," he says, "but I'm sure there'll be weather balloons of confetti thrown into the audience and stuff like that. They'll know it's us." (Additional reporting by Monica Herrera) ****************************** Alice Cooper ‘Elected’ ( note the year for you brain washed ‘Bo Rhap’ was the first video fanatics) link Still remember watching the ‘In Concert’ show on ABC….on a remote UHS station, because the show was banned on the two nearby VHS stations (too controversial). The video was inserted amongst this link (you can move on to the other vids) As to the best lead singer poll in the rag that queenonline quoted so that they could mention ‘Freddy’ as #2…..where was Mr. Furnier????? Alice was, and is, still one of the top 10. Saw him in Saginaw, ’77. Detroit ’87. Kalamazoo ’88. Still ticked that my folks would not let me go with friends to Philadelphia in ’72 during the BDB tour……….at the time, the hottest, biggest, profitable, extravagant tour. 56 cities in 90 days……..no wonder they burnt out afterwards and..........got to golf with Alice for four holes about ten years ago..........yes, he is frickin good. |
| Dan C. 15.12.2010 22:21 |
STILL no Warren Zevon? Jesus... |
| Crazy LittleThing 15.12.2010 23:15 |
Alice? Who the eff is Alice? ; ) link (warning: they drop the f-bomb in this song) |
| john bodega 16.12.2010 04:37 |
Hall of Fame's a joke, and it doesn't become any less of a joke even when they induct someone worth inducting. |
| its_a_hard_life 26994 16.12.2010 05:55 |
Hooray! ALICE COOPER RULES!!!!! |
| The Real Wizard 16.12.2010 15:49 |
The RRHOF is a joke. It will never be a "rock and roll" institution if Madonna is inducted and Yes aren't. |
| Dan C. 16.12.2010 21:36 |
I know! How the fuck can Yes NOT be in? |
| The Real Wizard 16.12.2010 22:41 |
Simple... because prog rock is over most people's heads... the Stones aren't. Instead of giving these bands more exposure, institutions like the RRHOF punish them for their "inaccessibility." |
| Sebastian 17.12.2010 06:44 |
I wish RRHOF's selecting-criteria documents appear on Wikileaks. Anyway, Alice rocks. Totally deserved. |
| lalaalalaa 17.12.2010 09:51 |
Megadeth better get in. If Metallica deserves it, then Megadeth triple deserves it. |
| Amazon 17.12.2010 13:15 |
I don't think it's fair to describe the Hall of Fame as a joke, since so many artists value induction. It isn't perfect, the nominees are afterall selected by fellow human beings, and one could even argue that it is in fact far from perfect. Personally, I am astounded that Deep Purple hasn't even been nominated yet. I also think that it has too much of an American focus. However that doesn't necessarily make it a joke. Alice Cooper obviously appreciates his induction, and every Hall of Fame or award will cause controversy. Also, regarding the induction of Madonna, the truth is that for good or for bad, many, if not most, of the inductees are not rock artists. |
| The Real Wizard 17.12.2010 14:57 |
In that case, it should be called the "popular music hall of fame." Musicians get inducted based on a combination of US sales and effect on US popular culture, not artistic integrity or contribution to the evolution of music... or even sales elsewhere in the world. Cliff Richard and Nana Mouskouri haven't even been nominated, and each have sold about as many records as Queen. The people who make the selections aren't even musicians, so they are limited in their abilities to make sound judgment. It would be like having a vegetarian select the best meat dish of the year based on the number of times it was ordered. But this is the way they want it, because it's all about MONEY. The panel consists of business people, not people with a passion for music. If they don't have artists who are popular in the US being inducted every year, how else will they sell those $20,000 tickets to the ceremony? Lady Gaga will be inducted in 2023 before ten prog and funk bands make their way in. Someone has to fund this thing, and this is their business plan. It takes a few years for some artists to get in (like Queen and Alice Cooper), otherwise they'll have nobody popular there a few years down the line. These things are most likely pre-determined many years in advance. I've been to the museum, and it is spectacular. But there are plenty of glaring omissions, and it won't change any time soon. |
| Holly2003 18.12.2010 05:10 |
It's a marketing brand, no more, no less. That doesn't automatically make it bad or good, but it helps appreciate it for what it is rather than what it's not. |
| john bodega 18.12.2010 11:38 |
"I don't think it's fair to describe the Hall of Fame as a joke, since so many artists value induction." That's because a lot of artists are emotionally unstable and gobble up validation like free candy! It doesn't matter if they value the thing. Of course they're going to value it; everyone knows the Academy Awards are a steaming pile, but it's all very different when they finally slap one on you. Who's going to turn down a room full of people saying that (literally) you were the best this year? Only people with a assload of integrity; that's a pretty short list. I don't really care whether some musicians respect the Hall of Fame; it is to awards ceremonies what Rolling Stone Magazine is to music literature. It's rubbish, and it will remain that way for all time, unless they ditch some of the 'artists' that have been inducted, and get the ones in there who deserve recognition (we know who they are). |
| Amazon 20.12.2010 18:50 |
Sir GH wrote: "The people who make the selections aren't even musicians, so they are limited in their abilities to make sound judgment." I don't agree in the slightest. I don't think one needs to be a musician to make a sound judgement. One can disagree with some of the choices (and I have my own fair share of complaints about the nominees and non-nominees) but it is simply nonsence to say that as non-musicians 'they are limited in their abilities to make sound judgment.' Afterall, being a musician isn't like being a doctor; while you wouldn't seek a diagnosis from a non-medical professional, there is no reason why a non-musician would be capable of making an informed judgement regarding the merits of possible inductees. "It would be like having a vegetarian select the best meat dish of the year based on the number of times it was ordered." Except that non-musicians are not vegetarians (an interesting analogy BTW considering some of your recent posts). Simply because someone is a non-musician does not mean they aren't informed or aren't an expert. That is not to say that the organisers of the Hall are experts (Jan Weider is the only one whose name comes to mind without my looking it up), but their being non-musicains does not make them non-experts. "But this is the way they want it, because it's all about MONEY. The panel consists of business people, not people with a passion for music." Fair enough. I think this is a much more valid criticism than them not being musicians. "Lady Gaga will be inducted in 2023 before ten prog and funk bands make their way in." I've actually never listened to her. But if in 25 years time, she's still remembered, and is considered to be worthy, then I have no problem with it. Her being a pop artist is not basis for her exclusion. Her being an ordinary or bad pop artist (which I can't comment on) would be. |
| Sebastian 21.12.2010 06:47 |
I agree with Amazon (never though I would but there you have it). Only musicians can choose musicians? Sure, then only American presidents can criticise Bush, and only German dictators can say whether Hitler was fair or not. |
| john bodega 21.12.2010 07:38 |
Yeah, I really don't think that being a musician would be a good criteria for being a selector at the RRHOF. It might mean the inclusion of great acts that generally get more respect from their fellows than from the general public, but it'd probably just descend into a big fat circlejerk. Musicians start inducting each other in return for earlier favours done, or as an opportunity to mend fences - before you know it, fucking Nickelback would get inducted, and no one would even be able to figure out whose fault it was. Having the selectors being purely musicians would make no more or less sense than ensuring that there were no musicians doing the selecting at all. It would be nice if they could hire people who don't have their heads firmly planted up their arses. There are too many acts being inducted - too many that don't deserve it - and far too many people not getting inducted who bloody should be. It can't get any fucking simpler than that. Madonna. Fucking Madonna. Do I even need to spell out the problem here? |
| Amazon 21.12.2010 19:00 |
Zebonka12 wrote: "That's because a lot of artists are emotionally unstable and gobble up validation like free candy! It doesn't matter if they value the thing. Of course they're going to value it; everyone knows the Academy Awards are a steaming pile, but it's all very different when they finally slap one on you. Who's going to turn down a room full of people saying that (literally) you were the best this year? Only people with a assload of integrity; that's a pretty short list." The thing is however one could say that about all awards. Since awards, by their nature, are subjective, one could all awards meaningless. Personally, I don't. While the Oscars are extremely flawed, I don't pretend that they are not the most prestigious cinematic awards in the world. Which they are. The Nobel prizes are extremely problematic, but I'm not going to deny their importance. That isn't to say that I will agree with every winner; I just won't throw the baby out with the bathwater. So, I'm delighted that Black Sabbath got into the Hall (even though it was 11 years too late), and I'm pleased George Harrison has been inducted as a solo artist. I'm also pleased that the Hall does not only induct rock artists. "it is to awards ceremonies what Rolling Stone Magazine is to music literature." The difference between the two is that there is no comparable hall of fame in music. With Rolling Stone, there are numerous other publications. "It's rubbish, and it will remain that way for all time, unless they ditch some of the 'artists' that have been inducted, and get the ones in there who deserve recognition (we know who they are)." Except that it's subjective. I know that I would be shocked if Guns 'N Roses never get inducted; you probably would disagree. I also know that plenty of people were disgusted that ABBA got inducted, while my only complaint was that they should have been inducted earlier. "before you know it, fucking Nickelback would get inducted, and no one would even be able to figure out whose fault it was.' :D I doubt that Nickelback will ever get inducted, and nor should they. I am a fan, but they don't deserve to be inducted at all. But then again, Bon Jovi and Kiss have been nominated. That's right, Kiss. I think it's an absolute travesty that Kiss has been nominated, unlike an arist like Deep Purple which has never been nominated. "Having the selectors being purely musicians would make no more or less sense than ensuring that there were no musicians doing the selecting at all. It would be nice if they could hire people who don't have their heads firmly planted up their arses. There are too many acts being inducted - too many that don't deserve it - and far too many people not getting inducted who bloody should be. It can't get any fucking simpler than that." There is no doubt that they could improve the process. While I don't think that being non-musicians is problematic, I agree with you that they shouldn't automatically be non-musicians either. Ideally, some would be musicians, some would be music journalists or critics, some would be historians, some would be less cleanly categorised. "Madonna. Fucking Madonna. Do I even need to spell out the problem here?" While I don't own any of her solo stuff, and while her 'controversial' persona pisses the hell out of me (OMG Madonna kissed a girl!), I do think she deserves her induction. |
| Sebastian 22.12.2010 06:09 |
But Madonna's not a rock artist, so she shouldn't be in the Rock 'n' Roll HOF. She should be in the Pop HOF (if there's ever one). Or should Pavarotti be inducted? Maria Callas? Art Tatum? Miles Davis? Edin Karamazov? John Williams (both)? |
| Mr.Jingles 22.12.2010 07:58 |
The RRHOF just keeps hitting new lows year after year. Rush, Yes, Depeche Mode, The Cure (and the list goes on and on) have never been nominated, and yet LL Cool J who is pretty much as "has been" in the hip-hop world get nominated? |
| Mr.Jingles 22.12.2010 08:04 |
There's a huge progressive rock bias on the RRHoF because most of the people who vote on who should be inducted are critics from magazines like Rolling Stone, who always bashed progressive bands because they thought they were being too over the top and pretentious. Does it come to anyone's surprise that a lot more punk acts have made into the Hall? |
| Amazon 22.12.2010 08:06 |
Sebastian wrote: "But Madonna's not a rock artist, so she shouldn't be in the Rock 'n' Roll HOF. She should be in the Pop HOF (if there's ever one)." The point is that the Hall, for good or for bad (I say good) does not simply induct rock arists. In fact a large number of inductees are not rock artists; the Beach Boys, Aretha Franklin, Sam Cooke, Marvin Gaye and any number of great soul singers, Sly and the Family Stone, Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five, ABBA, Michael Jackson etc... Michael was in fact inducted twice, as a member of the Jackson Five and as a solo artist. "Or should Pavarotti be inducted? Maria Callas? Art Tatum? Miles Davis? Edin Karamazov? John Williams (both)?" Miles Davis is in the Hall as a matter of fact. |
| Sebastian 22.12.2010 14:02 |
I stand corrected then. But in that case, IMO, they should change the name. Billboard HOF or Popular Music HOF would be less misleading. |
| Amazon 22.12.2010 19:12 |
Yes, I agree that renaming it something like the Popular Music Hall of Fame would be more accurate. However I suspect the reason they have the current name is that, annoyingly, rock has become generic. I remember a few years ago one of the magazines (forgot which one) did a special on 'female rock stars.' Except, here's the thing. None (or almost none) of them were rock artists! Rock has just become a generic label, and it also is one that awards credibility. If Madonna is a popstar, she's dismissed in the eyes of some, but as a rockstar, she becomes more respected. It also may give the Hall more credibility than it otherwise may have had. Finally, there have been quite a few artists whose careers may have included rock, or was mostly rock, but also explored other musical forms. |
| The Real Wizard 23.12.2010 11:38 |
Amazon wrote: "their being non-musicains does not make them non-experts." Of course not. But musicians and music psychologists understand what makes good music and why we like it in a way that non-musicians cannot. I'm not suggesting that the panel should consist purely of musicians, but there should be one or two music experts in there (someone like Alan Cross) who could make a sound judgment based on their expertise in the field. "It sounds good, it looks good, it tastes good" ... these are not good enough reasons to select things for being the best in any category. If anyone makes such a decision, or at least has a significant say in such decisions, it should people who are experts in the respective fields. Who wouldn't take a chef's word as to what the best restaurant in the city is? |
| The Real Wizard 23.12.2010 11:55 |
Sebastian wrote: "then only American presidents can criticise Bush, and only German dictators can say whether Hitler was fair or not." I see where you're going, but that's not a fair comparison. Politicians only ever speak when there is political gain to be made, so you still wouldn't get an honest response out of them. And it doesn't take a dictator to know a dictator when they see one. |
| john bodega 23.12.2010 13:41 |
"Politicians only ever speak when there is political gain to be made, so you still wouldn't get an honest response out of them." I hate to say it, but that's just a people thing. I look on music (the actual act, not the industry) as a higher thing than most human pursuits (probably because I'm a wanker), but the fact is that music can be just as political as any human endeavour. Even if musicians were only judged by their peers, 'political' decisions would be made. Don't ask me how one would safeguard against such a possibility, but I wager it'd be impossible. |
| Sebastian 23.12.2010 14:04 |
> Who wouldn't take a chef's word as to what the best restaurant in the city is? Loads and loads of people. > Politicians only ever speak when there is political gain to be made Unless you're a politician, you can't possibly know that :) > And it doesn't take a dictator to know a dictator when they see one. Likewise, it doesn't take a good musician to know a good musician when they see one. > but the fact is that music can be just as political as any human endeavour. Indeed > Even if musicians were only judged by their peers, 'political' decisions would be made. Indeed. |
| *goodco* 23.12.2010 17:37 |
RRHOF..........to be a couple of feet away from a Red Special, Deaky bass, Freddie's orange and white diamond leotard, Brian's Zandra Rhode's outfit, a Roger shirt...........was amazing for the HOF. Then again, they had a crinkled 45 sleeve of 'Radio GaGa'...................talk about cheap. Yes, Rush and Chicago deserve to be in (same with The Moody Blues). Chicago had seven straight #1 LPs in the USA, and in many ways changed the face of rock (pop/jazz). J.Geils epitomized party rock, but did not make it this year. Seems as if it is only a write in popularity contest, and if Jan Werner had a favorable response as to who was/was not good to party with, that's who made it in (unless totally overwhelmed by popularity). I am surprised that The Blues Brothers are not in, or have the biggest display in Cleveland, ..... Moving on.......I was bored to death years ago, and figured that the most influential group/solo artist for Queen....was Alice Cooper. Examples pre 1971 Don't Blow Your Mind......... Why Don't You Love Me->She Blows Hot & Cold, Don't Try So Hard, Don't Stop Me Now, Why Don't We Try Again, Love Me Like There's No Tomorrow Titanic Overture->Overture Piccante Living->Living On My Own Levity Ball->Dreamer's Ball There's later stuff, such as 'No More Mr. Nice Guy->Mr. Bad Guy Easy Action, I'm Going Home->Action This Day, Leaving Home Ain't Easy It's Hot Tonight->Hot Space, Tonight Under My Wheels-> Under Pressure You Drive Me Nervous->Driven By You Be My Lover->Your Kind Of Lover Dead Babies->Dead On Time, My Baby Does Me Killer->Killer Queen The reverse can be used as well..... DragonTown<-Dragon Attack We're All Crazy, Cold Ethyl<-Stone Cold Crazy |