Guns 'N' Roses

Night Prowler

Customer Deathcycle Manager
Staff member
GUNS N' ROSES is among 15 finalists for induction into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame. Also hitting the ballot for the first time are

THE CURE
HEART
JOAN JETT AND THE BLACKHEARTS
ERIC B. AND RAKIM
THE SPINNERS
THE SMALL FACES/FACES
FREDDY KING
RUFUS WITH CHAKA KHAN

, while previous nominees

BEASTIE BOYS
LAURA NYRO
WAR DONOVAN
RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS

also made the cut. Votes will be cast by a group of more than 500 musicians and industry professionals; of the 15 nominees, the five that get the most votes will be announced in January and inducted into the Hall Of Fame at its 27th annual ceremony on April 14, 2012 in Cleveland, Ohio, home to the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame And Museum.

Never heard of almost half of these nominees, also, RHCP nominated? :uhm: And all these other "never-heard-of-them" bands nominated before Kiss, Deep Purple, Iron Maiden and Judas Priest?
 

Yax

Ancient Mariner
Night Prowler said:
Never heard of almost half of these nominees, also, RHCP nominated? :uhm:
What's wrong with that? They are a rock band - Just not a Metal inclined Rock band.


However, that neither Maiden, Priest or Purple are in it is a disgrace and a certificate that RRHF isn't worth squat.
 

Perun

Dominus et deus
Staff member
I voiced my opinion on this thing a while ago:

Perun said:
I've never regarded the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame as being of any sort of significance. None at all. It's something that plays absolutely no role in my view on rock music. And it probably wouldn't be even if the inclusion of artists was more objective. In my opinion, any sort of Hall of Fame is just a premise for pointless, hour-long pub arguments that lie somewhere between what the best beer is and whether you prefer blondes or brunettes.

In other words: It all comes down to a matter of taste. You cannot assess the significance of a band objectively.

I could argue, for example, that I think Venom should be inducted in the Hall of Fame. Venom are a very old band, and they have laid the groundstone to the entire genre of Black Metal. However, the next person could say that Black Metal is either just a subgenre of Extreme Metal (and that Extreme Metal itself is just a subgenre of Heavy Metal), or that it is in fact not music but noise, and that a band that founded a genre of so little significance to the rock world as a whole needn't be regarded. We would get into a heated argument about originality vs artistry, and in the end none of us would win and nothing would have changed. To me, this entire Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame thing is all about that and nothing else.
 

Mosh

Winner of the 2020 Dumbest Comment Ever Award
Staff member
I'm willing to bet that GNR will get in. It's their first year eligible I think, and I always thought that they would be one to get in as soon as they were eligible. Like Metallica.
 

Yax

Ancient Mariner
Perun said:
I voiced my opinion on this thing a while ago:
KK Downing said something like "you have to suck up to a lot of people to get into RRHF.  :lol:
 

SinisterMinisterX

Illuminatus
Staff member
Madonna is the biggest singles artist of all time. She ruled charts worldwide for 20 years. And more than once she's had a notable cultural influence.

You may not like her music, but she's a no-brainer for the Hall. She is to to the 80s what the Beatles were to the 60s.
 

SinisterMinisterX

Illuminatus
Staff member
It's dance-pop, which the Hall has always included. If they really limited themselves to pure rock and roll, it'd be a very small roster... and it would have almost no one past the 60s. Dance-pop has always been part of the rock family, going all the way back to The Twist.

Rock expanded into many styles, and all its descendants appear to be eligible. I disagree with putting rap artists in there, though. Rap came from rock, but is something else and something more.
 

Mosh

Winner of the 2020 Dumbest Comment Ever Award
Staff member
It needs its own hall of fame I think. It could work. If metal was as mainstream, I would say that it deserves its own HoF too.
 

Dityn DJ James

A coma stole my name.
SinisterMinisterX said:
It's dance-pop, which the Hall has always included. If they really limited themselves to pure rock and roll, it'd be a very small roster... and it would have almost no one past the 60s. Dance-pop has always been part of the rock family, going all the way back to The Twist.

Rock expanded into many styles, and all its descendants appear to be eligible. I disagree with putting rap artists in there, though. Rap came from rock, but is something else and something more.

Beastie Boys always put Punk elements into their music. They use to be one of my favorites.
 

SinisterMinisterX

Illuminatus
Staff member
Beastie Boys have got enough rock in them (via punk etc) to be in the Hall. But if there were a rap hall too, they'd also be eligible there.

I'm sure you could come up with a big list of artists that are significant in both genres. Just for the impact "Walk This Way" had, Aerosmith would deserve some recognition from a rap hall.
 

Black Thunder

Ancient Mariner
Basically, the same song over and over...

She was popular, but she had few (but really good) hits, and I don't think she was more popular than MJ.
 

Mosh

Winner of the 2020 Dumbest Comment Ever Award
Staff member
Oh I highly doubt she was more popular than MJ, but why does that matter? He's in, twice. I think she was popular enough to be able to get in the hall of fame.
 

SinisterMinisterX

Illuminatus
Staff member
Black Thunder said:
She doesn't have much hits, I'm afraid. I would say Jackson was far more popular.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Look it up.

Jackson was intensely popular when he put out new albums, but fell off the radar just as fast. Overall, Madonna dominated world pop charts from about 1984 into this century.
Here, I did some work for ya.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ja ... iscography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna_si ... iscography

I'm only looking at the time their careers overlapped, which means starting from the release of Thriller.

Top ten singles:
Madonna: 36 in the US, 57 in the UK
Jackson: 19 in the US, 28 in the UK

Of the 24 years from 1982-2005 inclusive, in how many different years did each have hits?
Madonna: 15 in the US, 21 in the UK
Jackson: 9 in the US, 12 in the UK

And having personally grown up in the 80s: I assure you, except for Thriller mania in 1983, Madonna was by far the bigger star.
 

Forostar

Ancient Mariner
Madonna certainly did better since the 90s, yes.

But when we look at both total careers (Jackson's own albums from the seventies but also his work with The Jacksons and The Jackson Five boosted his popularity) or even if we zoom in at the 80s it's a different story.

The Thriller mania lasted very long. Until Thriller or even until Bad or Dangerous he was popular non stop.

From Madonna's wiki (about the 80s):
By the end of the decade, she was second only to Michael Jackson as the artist with the most number one songs.

Thriller, Bad and Dangerous, all did better than Madonna's most successful album True Blue, when we look at certifications or sales. I must admit that his sales increased immensely after his death.
 

Mosh

Winner of the 2020 Dumbest Comment Ever Award
Staff member
I dunno it probably still won't happen. Van Halen getting in was a perfect chance for a reunion yet the people accepting the award were ex band members.
 
Top