Metallica are deserving, but there’s no way in hell they should get in before Priest. Metallica helped create a subgenre; Judas Priest helped create the genre.
It’s bad enough that it took until 2006 for Sabbath to get in, and Iggy Pop/the Stooges still aren’t.
The RRHOF is a joke.
Of course Rush should be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Granted I’m mostly a fan, but aside from their obvious badassocity, they’ve had a pretty good run of very radio friendly hits over a decent stretch of time (and I will miss a bunch, I’m sure):
Working Man, 1974
Fly by Night, 1975
Closer to the Heart, 1977
Spirit of Radio, 1980
Freewill, 1980
Tom Sawyer, 1981
Red Barchetta, 1981
YYZ, 1981
Limelight, 1981
Subdivisions, 1982
The Analog Kid, 1982 (maybe not as much of a hit as I remember)
[This is where I kinda stopped paying attention, so the following may be a bit off]
Distant Early Warning, 1984
The Big Money, 1985
Time Stand Still, 1987
Show Don’t Tell, 1989
Roll the Bones, 1991
[This is where I completely stopped caring, so I’m done]
Not bad for 3 funny looking Canadians.
I thought it was because they blew chunks, but apparently that does not count against a band like Metallica. Yes, there’s a prejudice against “Prog Rock,” but blame Dave Marsh. Anyway, Rush is more of a POS Toronto bar band with pretensions of greatness grabbing for the coattails of other Prog Rock bands that are FAR more talented and over the top. Over the top is what made a great Prog Rock band.
And look at who has beat them so far! Rush is not the dirt beneath Solomon Burke’s feet!
I found it interesting that the author of the MSNBC article puts ELO in the Prog Rock camp. ELO is one of my favorite bands (along with Yes, the Moody Blues, and Queen), but I never really thought of them in the same way, I think because the core of ELO’s career was far more pop and accessible than many of the other progressive groups.
I’m pretty sure they won’t get in because they’re terrible
Cleary Rush polarizes people. But to say they’re terrible is pretty stupid. Hate them all you want, they’ve still sold millions of records and tickets and have millions of fans because they’re not terrible. I can only imagine how shitty I would think some of your favorite music is, but the bands are probably also not terrible just because I don’t like them.
The Guess Who and Rush are a staple on “classic rock” stations in the U.S., though they certainly sit on a lower rung than the big bands in that format (e.g., the Beatles, the Who, the Stones, etc.)
As for the other bands you mention, I’ve heard of Lighthouse, but couldn’t name a song of theirs, and I’ve never even heard of the others.
no, they’re awful. luckily, I have amazing taste in music so you wouldn’t be able to mock the bands I like.
I’m not really arguing who should be in there when, just who should be in there, and Metallica should certainly be there. That said, I pretty much agree with your other observations, and the RRHOF is not something I take with any seriousness whatsoever. In a just world, all these bands would be recognized for their contributions, and I’d argue that they certainly are, but not in any formal context like this.
Of course. Pretentious as well as ignorant.:rolleyes:
Lighthouse: One Fine Morning. This assumes that bands with horns are worthy.
Max Webster: Y’know, I live on one of the Great Lakes, the boundary between Civilization (with a “Z”) and Canuckistan, and I am of the Classic Rock generation, but who the fuck is he?
Kim Mitchell: Ditto.
I think the overthought, and obsession, compulsions lo to categorize and compartmentalize is the problem here. I don’t even know what prog rock is, yet I’ve enjoyed Rush as genuine rock and roll since youth. Apparently they have keyholed, penalized, and restricted me and my likes by genre once again.
Rushrocks.
And you are a punk kid who could never separate yourself from the crap Rush puts forth. You are, by definition, not a Boomer. No good Rush fan is. And as such, your opinion is less than worthless.
Sorry, but that’s just how it goes. In your next life try to be born into a generation that is more “with it.” 
I wish the HoF had decided early on to exclude rap, but it’s hard to keep out those early R&B artists, and after that it gets hard to draw a line.
I have long said that the whole this is a joke until they induct KISS. Love 'em or hate 'em (and I hate 'em a little more than I love 'em), they practically defined rock and roll for about fifteen years.
And yes, Rush more than deserves to be in.
Dire Straits and Peter Gabriel should be in there before Rush, but yes…Rush belongs in there too. Damn, at least they recognized Pink Floyd, otherwise the RRHoF is a sham.
[backpatting]
Well…
Good for you!
[/backpatting]
If you saw Rush in the mid-70s, you probably saw Max Webster as the warm up act, at least until Max Webster started touring on their own.
Yes, bands can be huge in Canada and completely unknown in the US. For every Barenaked Ladies or Rush, there are probably about 10 bands that will never crack the market down south. I’m just not sure anything from up here has ever penetrated Jann Wenner’s consciousness…
Oh, this one is easy.
Arena rock + keyboards = progressive rock!
No, no, no - there’s no *math *in Arena rock - and no hobbits!
(and don’t tell me Zep is arena rock…)
I don’t think Rush should be in there, looking at the inductee list. There is obviously a focus on innovation applied. Although what innovation applies to John Mellencamp and Bob Seger eludes me at the moment.
Kiss I can see eventually being inducted because of the whole make-up, stage play, circus, showmanship approach that really was innovative at the time: probably still is.
Rush is a technically sound band, for sure, but what genre did they forefront? What influence did they have? What did they do to change or mold our thoughts on music? These are the questions to be asked.
I would hazard to guess that as time passes it will be really hard to answer any of these questions. Just as Jackie Gleason and Lucille Ball are easy answers to television innovation, I’m not sure how I could come up with any nominees in the last 10 years. There’s probably some guy responsible for Survivor that spawned a whole new genre of TV, but I don’t know him. But what else has changed in the last 30 years of TV, really?
For Rock I feel the same way. Looking at the early inductee list is awesome, and I can appreciate most of the latter inductees as also being innovative. But where do we go from here, now that all of the children have grown up?
ETA: Not specifically related to WordMan’s post. I hit the wrong reply button.
Dr. J’s right about KISS and, though I’m not a big Phishhead, Phish deserves it (putting aside for a second the horseshittyness of the actual RRHOF, of course). But I totally understand they had to get Madonna in there first. Prioritizing is important.