MrPryck2U
ONE love, blood, life
Well, it's very cool that Madonna, John Mellencamp and Leonard Cohen got into the HOF, but the Beastie Boys should've gotten in too.
Axver said:I'm delighted that The Ventures are in. Couldn't give a shit about the rest.
lazarus said:Ray of Light did save her career, to be sure. And while she's never been regarded as a great singer, she can carry a tune. As for writing, she's co-written all of her material as far back as Like a Prayer, if I'm not mistaken, which is more than you can say for a great deal of artists who are in the Hall of Fame. She also learned to play a little guitar this decade to give her music another layer, authentic personailty. The point is that the reinvention wouldn't mean anything if there wasn't something substantial behind it. There's nothing phony about her exploration of sex in Erotica, her newfound spirituality through motherhood on Ray of Light, her political defiance on American Life, etc.
Also, seeking out new club sounds and working with them before they become trendy, always riding the wave of the moment is not something easily managed, and she's done it time and time again. When you compare her to acts like Britney, Paris, etc. you're doing her a disservice because Madonna has always been much deeper--she's much more of an artist than those teeny-boppers (something she never really was).
corianderstem said:Well, you could nitpick the genres of pop and rock and roll until you're blue in the face, but I think it's pretty pointless.
The HOF is obviously using a broader definition of "rock and roll" that goes beyond three chords played loudly by a bunch of white dudes.
corianderstem said:Her voice has totally improved over the years. She still doesn't have the best voice, but that training she had prior to filming Evita really paid off. She's come a long way from the thin voice she had on her first few albums.
LemonMelon said:Madonna is cool, but it's just one more artist that isn't remotely rock n' roll in the Rock Hall.
lazarus said:
What the hell does that mean? Does Tina Turner belong? Where do you draw the line? Because rock and roll often overlaps with funk, R&B, and certainly dance. Because of this hybridization with so much of what is going on and has gone on in music, these distinctions are nearly impossible. Are New Order rock and roll? Because something like Blue Monday is a pure dance track, yet the band plays real instruments on most of their songs. How about the Bee Gees? Their earlier work was guitar-based, but they struck it big with disco and the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack.
The beauty of rock and roll is that it has blended so many genres, from folk to country to blues to hip-hop to gospel to electronica. Under this umbrella we can include not only guitar bands, but people like Ray Charles, Miles Davis (who had 2 guitarists in one of his bands while his own trumpet was hooked up to a wah-wah pedal), Little Richard, James Brown, Bob Marley, Joni Mitchell, Prince, Beastie Boys, etc. To sit there and say "isn't remotely rock and roll" without defining what it is comes off not only as snobbery but a total misconception of the term.
LemonMelon said:I do consider classic R&B to be in the rock n' roll category simply because it stands for Rhythm & Blues, the cornerstones of early rock. It was incredibly influential on the genre.
lazarus said:
Well here's where your argument falls apart. You want to include the stuff that doesn't sound like rock because it influenced it, yet you want to exclude the stuff that doesn't sound like rock because it's more directly descended. That doesn't make any sense.
lazarus said:But if you're talking influence as a major criteria, how can you NOT include Madonna? Because hers goes far beyond Britney and co.