I usually don't pay much attention to RHOF nominess and induction. This year, I happened to follow the topic on multiple sites, including prince.org and have generally been appalled by everything surrounding the RHOF.

Instead of being a celebration of music and musicians, RHOF induction week is overrun with bickering, pettty sqabbling, targeted insults, and all sorts of negative commentary from music writers and fans alike.

No one is satisfied with the RHOF. Everyone has a bone to pick. It doesn't feel like a celebration, but, rather, mourning, of music.

First, there is a core definitional issue that hundreds or thousands of fans seem to be stuck on. I read SO many posts retreading the tired point that this or that artist shouldn't be inducted to the RHOF because they don't perform "rock and roll." It's as if these idiot posters haven't noticed that in the last two decades the RHOF has grown to encompass many generes of popular music. Sure, "Rock and Roll" Hall of Fame may be a bit of misnomer at this point (and it really should just be Music Hall of Fame or Popular Music Hall of Fame), but given who is nominated and inducted, you'd think these "rock" purist fans would have figured out by now that 'Rock and Roll" is just shorthand for the aforementioned "music" or "popular music" and not spend hundreds of posts objecting to artists based on genre. Let's say there was once a pure "rock and roll" hall of fame and then the curators publicly proposed including other genres before they actually did it. THAT would be the time to object, not decades after the power-that-be have decided to include more than "rock and roll." It's a tired argument, and it doesn't need to be beat to death. We get it, Donna Summer (for example) isn't a rock artist. But, the RHOF, name notwithstanding, isn't simply "rock and roll" hall of fame. The argument is such a fucking distraction, and at this point, pointless.

Second, the whole concept brings out the worst in ALL fans and commentators. Music is personal. For many fans, it's part of their identity. rejecting an artist for nomination or induction is rejecting the fans of that artist. And, they'll spare no expense telling the world how they're favorite artists have been wronged and how the whole thing is "bullshit." (example, today a Salon.com poster posited that the RHOF has no legitimacy at all until Rush is inducted). But, it doesn't stop there. I understand defending artists who don't get in. But, there is that unfortunate extra step of denegrating and insulting the artists that do get in. That negativity is so fucking awful and makes the whole thing horrible, IMO. I don't believe the Red Hot Chili Peppers or the Beastie Boys should be in before War. But, I don't begrudge RHCP or BB their inclusion. They didn't ask for it. It's not heir "fault." Yet, music fans who think there are more deserving aritsts will rip them to shreds because of it. The whole thing devolves into music elitism, name calling, racism (in every direction , i.e., these black artists aren''t deserving because of some bullshit "rock purity"/their not the right genre argument, or simply because some narrow-minded white elitist rock fan/critic can't or won't recognize their contribution to music because the can't or don't want to understand it, and on the other hand, fans of snubbed black musicians insisting that every non-black artist somehow has zero real talent and skill and offers nothing creative or unique in their music because, after all, they stole it from black musicians), sexism, homphobia, and any other sort of high school clique, zero-sum, "I'm right, you're wrong" argument. reading the posts in resonse to RHOF ceremonies is fucking depressing. So much for music inspiring people and bringing people together.

So many say that the RHOF is "irrelevant." I'll accept that the RHOF is irrelevant in regards to who fans (including me) value as important musicians. But, clearly, in the larger sense it isn't irrelevant at all judging by all of the commotion surrounding nominations/induction.

One thing I personally agree with in a lot of the commentary/fan posts is that the RHOF is about about as anti "rock and roll" of a thing that could be imagined. Music's role as a free form of expession, a place of rebellion, a platform for alternative or non-mainstream points of view, a vehicle for social commentary and social change, an umbrella to bring people together, would seemingly be the last fucking thing that should be "honored" by induction into a corporate-controlled, highly political, institution. There's nothing less "rock and roll" than the RHOF.

Yet, it's here to stay. I love many of the artists inducted and think that those artists are worthy of whatever generic "important" or "influential" tag that the RHOF is attempting to put on them, Further, as stated, I don't begrudge any artist who gets in, even the ones I don't agree with. Any issues I may have are with the RHOF itself and the nominating committees, not the artists. But, in a perfect world, the RHOF and all of he attendant commentary and bickering would not exist. It never gets me excited about music. It only makes me depressed.

MR COLTRANE, THE RRHOF AND EVERY OTHER AWARDS SHOWS ARE PLATFORMS USED BY RECORD COMPANYS EXECS TO PLAY SICK HEAD GAMES WITH A LOT OF ARTIST WHO ARE NOT GETTING THEIR DUE IN THE INDUSTRY.

Chuck Berry is in, that is all that matters.

I really think that they would be doing themselves a huge favour by changing the name. It is ludicrous to have a rock and roll hall of fame that includes Madonna, Run DMC and Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five while at the same time excluding Kiss. As long as the phrase "rock and roll" is a prominent part of the title of the institution fans will justifiably be upset by the inclusion of non rock and roll artists, particularly if those inclusions are at the expense of "real" rock and roll artists.

We are now up to 1987 as far as the year when artists are eligible. Today Rock and Roll is essentially dead and has been since roughly the mid-late 90s. It will be interesting to see who gets inducted starting around 2020 or 2025. Until the hall changes the name these kinds of debates are only going to intensify in the years ahead.

I just tune out all the non-rock and roll acts they induct, so it remains the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame for me.

I've been there once. It was VERY cool.

BTW, as much as I hate rap and hip-hop and don't recognize any inclusion of them in the RHOF, I still recognize the RHOF encompasses more than rock, as the OP said.

James Brown and Sam Cooke were in the original class (1986), and Hank Williams was in the second class.

Names are difficult. Is Aerosmith rock like Paul Revere and The Raiders? The former is in and the latter is not. Is rock the same as rock and roll? Would there be rock and roll or rock without blues or jazz or r&b? Is r&b and soul the same thing?

Why is there no legit r&b awards show? Why does BET have a BET HIP-HOP AWARDS and no R&B AWARDS? The CMA honors Country Music. There is a Country Museum in Nashville. Where is the soul museum? If such did exist would it include: gospel, jazz, blues or folk?

Rock and Roll is supposed to a culture and all inclusive according to the RRHOF, I say does it matter, it's all in a name. Some of the inclusions are bizzare, and some of the ignored are an outrage - but hey the Grammys have male acts competing with female acts now in r&b as BEST R&B VOCAL PERFORMANCE.

Preach Coltrane3 i feel you and i think The Marvelettes should get in.....But who am i to say. I hear your argument and agree. Music should bring us together!!!!! These record folks are just to much.....So i go against to grain when it comes to my musical likes a lot of times.......

Thinking about it, membership in the RHOF means absolutely nothing in terms of anything having to do with music. Have you ever seen someone push an act based on their being in the RHOF? It's not like anyone says, "Here's the new album by Rock and Roll Hall of Fame member Bruce Springsteen!"

Pretty much anyone in the RHOF can sell albums or concert tickets on their name alone. They don't need to add "RHOF member".

So, I now think that the advantages to being inducted into the RHOF are these:

1. You get to see a great jam session with the inductees and others, resulting in gems like Prince's solo on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps"; and

2. It's a place for historical artifacts of the members to be put on display. In that regard the RHOF is most important, IMO. With almost no exceptions, the RHOF is the ONLY place where historical items could be gathered and displayed for you and I to see.

I guess there could be: 3. It makes the artist feel validated. But of course, it makes other worthy artists feel otherwise (see the War thread).

the hof has always seemed to me to be self-congratulatory. those types of things are in most every field. it doesn't bother me so much- they seem to mean well. its rather like the walk of fame in los angeles. neither are necessary or relevant. both started out with good intentions but have fallen off.

imo