The Hall has always been a joke. I would think serious artists would WANT to be on the outside. What a slap in the face to innovators and revolutionary talents to calcify them in the ultimate expression of moribund establishmentarianism.

Johnny Lydon (nee Rotten) was on Steve Jones' radio show yesterday, and he mentioned that he was denied filming there for his old TV show on VH1. Seems that he had issue with a piece of paper on display there in which it was claimed he wrote all the lyrics to "Anarchy in the UK." He said no such a piece of paper exists, therefore this display was a phony. The response from the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame: "Our source is irrefutable" and they refused to take it down.

Um... more irrefutable than the guy who piece of paper it's supposed to be?

You know it was in trouble once they chose Cleveland for the site.

What strikes me about the inductee list the author linked to is how many of the performers weren't remotely "rock and roll" artists. Many of the ones that were genre rock 'n' rollers were mediocre, at least in terms of innovation and originality -- maybe the election criteria are weighted heavily toward the number of records sold. I thought the Dave Clark Five were great, when I was 12. And I know they sold a lot of records before in 1963-64, so they should be a shoo-in next year.

The list gives a good flavor of who's on the voting committee. I've always had the impression that this Hall of Fame was more a nostalgia gig anyway.

btw, "Johnny Rotten (nee Lydon)", not the other way around.

They're meaningless. Everything they do. That they'd strive for some color by reaching for Rap, hoo boy. Never mind them overlooking the late Arthur Lee and Love, which was as shameful as any of their other considerable omissions.

Then again, who actually goes to the Hall of Fame looking to gain an understanding or appreciation of Rock? Either you've got it, or you don't. My impression of sports halls of fame is that that's where fans of sports go, for whatever reason, to see their heroes honored. But would fans of Rock really find much at the Hall of Fame that they can't get on an album, a CD, an iPod already?? It's like an R'N'R Shrine for non-music lovers. The Hall of Fame is the Mistake by the Mistake by the Lake.

I have mixed emotions about the RRHOF. Just like any type of award, such as the Oscars, the Emmys, etc there are always issues, problems and questions with the nominations and the winners. Just think of the horrid track record of the Golden Globes and the Grammys.

Overall, I think the RRHOF has been pretty on the mark about its selections, although some are definitely questionable. I was not sure about including a rap act, but if you think about it, Johnny Cash, Miles Davis, Howlin Wolf and many others in RRHOF are not really rockers in the classic sense. And, one must acknowledge that rap music has been a huge force in the music industry the past twenty years.

Regarding Jann Wenner, the only thing I will note is that Jann apparently is a HUGE John Mellencamp fan and wrote a very moving forward to John's recent Greatest Hits CD Collection. And, John Mellencamp is NOT in the RRHOF. Lets hope that the Dave Clark Five and John get into the Hall in 2008.

Ray

The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has been beleaguered from its conception. Like an asshole, everyone has an opinion on who is important in rock and roll.

I am originally from Cleveland and I remember the loud and angry cries when that city was chosen as the location. (Based on comments from New York and Memphis residents, you’d think that Cleveland was some sort of third world country.) Similar complaints about the Rolling Stone “best radio station” reader poll contest were also heard when Cleveland’s WMMS won year after year.

The fact is that who should be inducted is a highly subjective decision. There is never a correct answer to the question of “whose art is best?” The best you can do is get a bunch of knowledgeable people together and try to reach a consensus. Disagreements are to be expected.

Why does the committee need to include many minorities to make correct decisions? Are you accusing the committee of being racist? Why should people who weren’t even born during the early eras of rock and roll have a heavy representation on the committee? The last thing we need is some 20 year old who knows nothing of rock and roll before

Personally, I think that the committee has done a reasonable job of making a very tough decision. They’ve acknowledged many black early influences and found ways to acknowledge performers, producers, etc that seem obscure to the average person but have influenced rock and roll in important ways. To me, this indicates that these folks have done their homework and that they know the history of rock and roll well and that they are not making decisions based solely on “popularity.”

Additionally, it is true that to ignore the influence of rap any longer would be unfortunate. Grandmaster Flash is widely acknowledged to have been start of rap’s domination of the pop charts.

It’s easy to criticize Jann Wenner. However, keep in mind that Rolling Stone is still one of the most innovative and best-written publications on the popular media available today.

The R&RHOF does indeed belong in Cleveland, because although several cities could claim to be the musical "birthplace of rock & roll," it was a Cleveland disk jockey, Alan Freed, who both popularized the term itself, AND introduced the various sounds covered by that umbrella label to "mainstream" (white suburban) teenage audiences. Museums celebrate culture, and R&R owes its existence as a cultural, as opposed to merely musical, phenomenon to "Moondog" Freed.

As for the DC5,yes I was disappointed that they haven't made the cut yet. IMHO they were proto-punks back in the 60s; listen to their take-no-prisoners approach to making R&B standards rock out! One of the most under-rated stalwarts of the British Invasion.