Maybe after the Partridge Family and the Archies get in. Maybe.
FWIW, the eligibility requirements for the RRHOF. How do the Monkees fit the requirements?
Not a chance. A fake band utterly lacking in musical originality or lasting influence on rock.
And if they get in before the Moody Blues, someone’s gonna get hurt.
Although I firmly believe “Daydream Believer” is a better song than 98% of what the Beatles put out, I can’t really see how the Monkees meet the stated qualifications.
I wonder how strict they are about the stated qualifications though.
I’ve fought this battle many times over the years.
Evaluating The Monkees honestly is tough because — given their origins as a put-together, made for TV band — they produced a hell of a lot more really good music than they ever could have been expected to.
Some arguments for them on the plus side:
[ul]
[li]Most of their hit singles were very good, on a par with most contemporary Top 40 hits.[/li]
[li]They also had some really excellent (and in some cases very forward-thinking) album cuts as well.[/li]
[li]Micky Dolenz had one of the great pop voices of the 1960s.[/li]
[li]MIchael Nesmith was a fine songwriter who had an interesting voice as well.[/li]
[li]Peter Tork was a skilled multi-instrumentalist (classically trained on the piano, and part of the Greenwich Village folk scene)[/li]
[li]Their two finest albums (Headquarters and Pisces, etc.) were done with The Monkees themselves playing nearly all or at least many of the instruments and writing many of the songs.[/li][/ul]
On the other hand, it’s unlikely that anyone would be talking about The Monkees for RRHOF induction if it weren’t for the unique opportunities their TV show presented them:
[ul]
[li]Without the TV show, they wouldn’t have had LA’s finest studio musicians and some of pop music’s finest songwriters at their disposal. Thus most likely, their first several Top 40 hits would never have been written or recorded by them.[/li]
[li]While those songs would have been hits had they somehow been recorded anyway (they were good enough to stand on their own merits even without TV exposure), their albums would not have been the massive sellers they were without the exposure afforded both them and The Monkees as personalities on the TV show.[/li]
[li]They wouldn’t have had the gobs of studio time made available to them, nor the clout to demand greater control and indulge their more experimental whimseys on their subsequent albums — which is where most of the high regard their music now enjoys is founded.[/li][/ul]
In the end, the TV show is the sticking point. No other member of the RRHOF, with the possible exception of Rick Nelson — who enjoyed many of the same kinds of benefits The Monkees did (but also had a longer career) — had that unique stepping stone to not only mass exposure, but the additional benefits enumerated above that it conferred.
And by the way, I also recognize the importance and revolutionary nature of the TV show itself apart from Monkees music — but then we get into whether we recognize members of the RRHOF for non-musical reasons.
Bottom line: I won’t tear my hair out if The Monkees get in one day — I really do like them a lot. But in one sense, if they do they ought to have an asterisk next to their name.
Seconded. It’s about as meaningful as a sidewalk star in Hollywood.
Consider that sports HOFs include executives, owners, referees and umps, etc.
The Monkees were NOT a traditional band and did not follow the narrow rules of being a performing musical group… but they did have tremendous accomplishments, whether they were a Fab or Fake Four (or a corporation). I say let 'em in on a special basis.
From the bizarre lyrics of Head:
What’s not to love?
A suggestion for some who may be thinking about posting here…
It’s just me, but I would never think about arguing the merits of one rap performer vs. another. I know very little about rap as a genre, and virtually none of its history or the context in which it developed. While I don’t particularly like rap music, I wouldn’t want to comment on it or any of its artists, as I would risk of revealing myself to be really foolish and ignorant. So I don’t.
Whenever Monkees threads crop up, you can count on some people tossing off dismissive comments that are founded entirely upon ignorance…and absolutely no knowledge of how their career unfolded over time, and very little knowledge of the totality of the music they produced or the circumstances of its production.
Those inclined to do this may want to reread my second paragraph.
Oops…too late for some of you. 
I demand satisfaction! Beards! At Sunset!
If you going to have a slow, pointless death, why not have it somewhat poetically at sunset? We’ll have all day to get drunk, and it’ll look oddly romantic to onlookers while we roll around and try to stuff our beards in each other’s mouths in the gently setting sun. If you’re a woman, just don’t…either way, don’t tell the wife.
No, I don’t have any mind bleach. Why do you ask?
I really want to do what you ask, because I don’t want to post an opinion if mine isn’t as worthy as yours, but which counts as your second paragraph? Does that first sentence fragment count, so the second paragraph is about how you’re ignorant about rap, or does the paragraph about when Monkees threads pop up, people will post dismissive comments founded in ignorance count as the second? Which paragraph should I reread?
Yeah, why not? They recorded some songs with long lasting popularity. It’s not like the RRHOF is more than a colossal circle-jerk anyway.
Hmm…I thought my paragraphs were pretty well-deliniated by the blank lines between them. If you’re worried about the technicalities of sentence fragments on an internet message board, seems to me you’re trying a bit too hard.
As for worthy opinions, I’m sure you’re familiar with the simile that ends with “everybody’s got one” and has a reference to a body orifice immediately before that.
But I hope we can agree that an opinion based on knowledge carries a little more weight than an opinion based on ignorance.
Is that OK with you? Or would you like to argue that point with some more “clever” repartee?
For the record, the R&RHOF also inducts producers, managers (Brian Epstein, Andrew Loog Oldham), label executives (Marshall Chess, Ahmet Ertegun), DJs and media personalities (Tom Donahue, Dick Clark), etc. Shit, *Don Kirshner *is in the Hall already.
All true, but as far as inducting musical acts themselves, my question was whether matters that go beyond the music they recorded should come into consideration.
In previous discussions, for example, some have pointed to David Bowie’s development of on-stage personas (and accompanying stage shows) distinct from him as an individual as being groundbreaking, and therefore a non-musical factor that should count towards his RRHOF worthiness.
I’m not sure how I feel about that. I’m not a big Bowie fan, but could an argument for his induction be made strictly on the basis of his recordings?
In any case, I still would think there’s a tighter link between Bowie’s stage persona and his music than there is between the Monkees’ TV show (whatever its considerable merits) and their music.
The Monkees had catchy songs but they had no lasting influence on R&R and if you have to go to the trouble to point out that “On these two albums they even played their own instruments!”, your argument is already lost. Don’t get me wrong, I really love The Monkees. They’re a ton of fun. But they don’t belong in the upper echelon, as it’s defined by those at the RRHOF.
They’re one of those ‘on the bubble’ groups, where neither their inclusion nor their omission would be scandalous.
I voted to let the people vote on it. I would vote no, but that’s me. If I had to pick a favorite Monkees song, it would be Daydream Believer, and of course they didn’t write it.
Not to forget, they also gave Jimi Hendrix his first break, when they made him their opening act.
And IIRC (and I may not), they were also the first group to use a Moog synthesizer.
I think the Monkees oughtta be in the RRHOF. It would be a statement, one that admits what Rock n’ Roll has become, one that admits what it has been for quite some time.
I draw the line, however, at the Banana Splits.
“One banana, two banana, three banana, four…”