And the thing is, Sabbath is arguably more influential than anyone short of the Beatles, insofar as creating new genres and inspiring future bands. And they didn’t get in until last year. It wasn’t talent, it wasn’t innovation, and it certainly wasn’t skill keeping them out. (Half of Sabbath started as a jazz band. This explains much.)
Well, that squares it. The Rock and Roll HOF is a complete joke. I’m not even a fan of any of these bands except for Skynyrd (and thanks for spelling that correctly), but they should all be no-brainer first ballot winners*. It took Black Sabbath 8 tries? Double-you tee eff? No Rush? No Van Halen? Fuck that.
I was going to chime in that KISS deserves entry, but now that I know how much of a joke the HOF is, I don’t really give a fuck.
- with the possible exception of *Chic *and the Sir Douglas Quintet, whom I’ve never heard of.
Well, you and I profoundly disagree - say what you will, but Never Mind the Bollocks rocks as an album and had a HUGE influence.
KISS? Liked 'em when I liked comic books, but found the Watchmen as a grown up and replaced KISS with so many good bands. I vote no. They appeal to everything that is wrong to me about great songs. They go for the cheap appeal.
That’s about how I see it, too. They were big enough, for long enough, and influential enough (big hair, makeup, pyrotechnics, etc.) that I think they oughta be in the R&RHoF. And I’m not even a fan.
As soon as my heart stops breakin,
And tears stop makin,
When they create the Novelty Band Hall of Fame, Kiss can go in first. They don’t belong in the R’nR HoF.
I realize many people will ignore this request, but I’m curious…
For those of you saying that KISS doesn’t belong, would you mind stating who you would put in the HOF (that’s not in there already) and why? I think it’ll give some contect to the discussion since according to my read of the HOF’s stated criteria, KISS arguably belongs.
Perhaps not nominated, but definately represented. I was just there a few months ago and I seem to remember plenty of artifacts (especially Duran Duran who have an entire wall full of their outfits and such). I think some of these are shoo ins when they decide to do the era’s these performers represent.
Of those who aren’t in I would say Rush and Deep Purple, definitely, and I don’t much care for Rush. But going on the quality of the music, which is my criteria, play the best of Rush or Deep Purple alongside the best of Kiss, and Kiss clearly is a distant third in quality- musicianship, soloing, lyrics, everything. Kiss are clearly more popular, but there recorded output just doesn’t measure up. The grabbed hold of a gimmick and made a fortune, but that doesn’t make them a good band.
If you were to pick the ten best songs by the above three, would any KISS songs be included?
You could say the same thing about Elvis.
I read a post several years ago (maybe here on the Dope) where someone explained that some musical artists/groups were significant, not because of the quality of their lyrics, their musicianship or their voices, but for who they were and how they performed.
The example they used was Jim Morrison and the Doors. Their music was not particularly special or innovative, but Morrisons personality and live performances were. Had another lead singer fronted the band, chances are no one would remember them today.
I think the Sex Pistols are also a good example. There were other bands doing the same sort of thing, but the personalities of the band members and the promotion and publicity that surrounded them put them in the spotlight. The album, Never Mind the Bollocks was the punk rock album that got all the attention and was the standard that all the wanna-be’s aspired to match and one of the standards that many consider today to be one of the more important rock albums of all time.
Even their die-hard fans will agree that KISS was not a great band lyrically and their musicianship was not stellar, but many great performers have proven that you don’t need Dylanesque lyrics, Eddie Van Halen musicianship and Elvis Presley vocals to play good rock music. KISS was a great basic rock band, costume rock and arena rock. No one did it better for longer or was as famous for it. I think they have earned a right to be in the Hall of Fame.
No you couldn’t. Whatever else you may think of him, Elvis had a remarkable voice.
Well, it seems to me the arguments are breaking down into three groups depending on admission criteria:
-
Popularity - then I say yes, Kiss was bigger in it’s day, and as well known now, as many or most of the current inductees. They had more hits and sold more albums than most of them.
-
Influence - then I say yes. Without Kiss leading the way, there wouldn’t have been a 80’s hair band movement. Kiss also, along with Alics Cooper, did more to make concerts “shows” with pyrotechnics and special effects than any other band. They changed the way many bands perform and revitalized the concert going experience. They also were probably the first band to realize the symbiotic relationship between product centered marketing and music. Without Kiss you probably wouldn’t have the artist as product leading to Madonna, Britney Spears, N*Sync, etc. Now, it might be that their influence isn’t seen as positive, but it is hard to say that Kiss wasn’t very influential.
-
Musical talent - Then no, they just aren’t there. But if musical talent were really the criteria, then most of the inductees would be little known virtuosos who played in little venues and never “sold out”.
Based on that, then - yes they should be in.
Only if you weren’t paying attention. Elvis was so much more than a fat caricature. Among other things, he introduced black music into mainstream culture. And without black music, you have no rock and roll.
Oh, and isn’t Lester Bangs in the R&R Hall of Fame? I could be wrong but I don’t think he could sing that well. 
When you think of how many other artists name these two bands as influences …
I know I can’t be the only person who took up the bass after hearing Geddy Lee jamming on Freewill. There are plenty of bassists in popular bands who started the same way.
Absolutely. And a million drummers from the metal through alt and such genres first picked up sticks while saying ‘Fuck, man. Neil Peart is rad.’
ID that quote and win a prize!
Google:
"Your search - “Fuck, man. Neil Peart is rad.” - did not match any documents. "
If it’s not on Google, I maintain it doesn’t exist. You’re a liar!
They have already started doing those eras. Any band that released ther first record before 1981 is already elligible for nomination. The trick is getting the nominating committee to actually nominate you. No nomination no election ever. For those the committee likes a nomination every year until you are elected.
Ok, here’s the thing: Fame != notoriety.
KISS is notorious. They had some musicianship, produced a couple of catchy songs. But they’re a cheeseball band that marketed simplistic songs to children in a horrorshow package. Sort of a dark poseur answer to Sesame Street. There are so many bands whose work stands up better, that if critics are doing the picking, I don’t blame them for saying, “eh, not this year” every year until Gene Simmons’ kids are all old & grey.