Anybody that Knows about VR, like the RRHOF should of, they grew up listening to Punk, 70's music, Stones , etc.,.................. Not VH! RRHOF is to blame,I think.
I caught the VH segment with Velvet Revolver and it did stink up the joint. By the way, Dave stated he wasnt going to make it to the ceremony about a week ago.
Anyways, the Rock-N-Roll Hall Of Fame is a downright joke. Its pretty wild that there isnt ONE prog band in yet, but they have enough hip-hop stuff to choke a person.
I didn't hear that about Dave. Did he say why? Why's he so busy all of a sudden? I think the American Hall of Fame makes way more sense then the UK Hall of Fame. I mean, who did they induct? Madonna? Robbie Williams? Alanis Morissette? But I see what you're saying about prog rock bands. I mean other then Pink Floyd I don't know what other prog bands have been inducted. Also, I thought this year was the first time they included hip hop.
Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five represented the first of what may someday be many hip-hop artists in the hall, whose museum is located in Cleveland. Flash's turntable-scratching techniques and the memorable refrain of "The Message" -- "Don't push me 'cause I'm close to the edge" -- were recalled.
Hunched over a podium, rapper Jay-Z read his induction speech off a PDA. "Thirty years later rappers have become rock stars, movie stars, leaders, educators, philanthropists, even CEOs," he said. "None of this would have been possible without the work of these men."
I'm trying to find the article now Sandra about Dave not going, but its going to take me a little while as its buried in a bunch of posts at the classic rock forum I belong to. Bare with me.
As for Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five,,,isnt that enough for anybody? No, I really thought there were of those type of artists already elected, but I didnt check. Its still sad.
I didn't hear that about Dave. Did he say why? Why's he so busy all of a sudden? I think the American Hall of Fame makes way more sense then the UK Hall of Fame. I mean, who did they induct? Madonna? Robbie Williams? Alanis Morissette?
You're right. It makes no sense. To most people in the UK Van Halen are as ridiculous as you probably consider Robbie (who's a f*cking hero ) to be. sometimes the gulf that seperates us is more than just water. And Madonna is THE most successful female recording artist of all time.
First off, I'm not a representative of my whole country. This is one persons opinion and I'm sure there are at least a COUPLE of British people who share this opinion. As a matter of fact, I know there are because I've visited message boards where this same sentiment was expressed by people from the UK.
Second, I'm not insulting your country by stating that I think some of the choices of inductees is lame. I mean, I'm considering who DIDN'T get in and why these artists deserve to be chosen over others that have far more merit in being chosen for a Hall of Fame. Personally, I don't think Robbie Williams or Alanis Morissette have been around long enough to deserve that honor. And what groundbreaking or innovative music have they put out? Popularity doesn't always mean quality. It's a factor, but there needs to be something beyond that. Sure they have some good songs, but still, this is a Hall of Fame. What are the standards?
As for Madonna, great, she's successful. So what. I don't think her music has broken any ground, I don't think she's contributed anything worthwhile and I don't think creating controversy by cheap gimmicks and influencing a generation of Brittanys is worth praising. But again, that's MY opinion. I'm sure there are many Americans who just adore Madonna and think she's actually relevant because she's in a lot of magazines and gossip shows.
About Van Halen. Are there other bands that are more deserving than them? Sure. But they have been around long enough and have accomplished enough to where they are not that bad a choice. They influenced a whole new genre of music. Eddie Van Halen's guitar playing was innovative (hand tapping, speed picking, etc.) and he continues to be an influence on new generations. Not to mention the commercial success and longevity they've had. I'm sure they sold a few records in the UK despite them being considered ridiculous by your people. I'll let you in on something. Many Americans thing they're ridiculous! Have you read TK's posts? What nationality has to do with it is beyond me. Again, I questioned some choices made by whoever it is choosing the UK inductees. I do happen to think the US Hall of Fame has a better way of choosing artists. I like the guidelines better. If the UK place had those guidelines instead, I'd say it. It's not a thing of being from one country or another. That just makes no sense to me that that would even come up.
Once again I'd like to remind you that this is one persons opinion who happens to be American. The gulf you speak of is getting smaller and smaller as the decades go by. That's sort of an old fashioned way of thinking. The whole "two countries separated by one language" thing is a little antequated. We're becoming much more alike than you'd like to think.
Whoa Sandra. I had hoped my smiley face indicated that I wasn't overly offended. Just boxing for my corner, that's all. The US RHoF's own blurb states: "The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame honors the legendary performers, producers, songwriters, disc jockeys and others who have made rock and roll the force that it is in our culture." No mention of innovation or groundbreaking being required. I think Hall of FAME says it all. However she's done it, she is THE most famous woman in rock. (just as an example Tom Petty's in there - he's no innovator. Just well liked and sold sh8t load of records) I can see why Robbie is controversial but longevity can't be a qualifier either because he's had a recording career longer than The Beatles. And he's HUGE in the UK and europe. I'll take your word on the guidelines thing - I have no idea - but you can see how I wouldn't have got that from your original post. Not everyone in the UK thinks Van Halen are ridiculous. I'm sure they'd fill Wembley Arena a few times over. Sorry - I think there is a cultural gap between our two nations. And any cross-atlantic influences is definately one way (west to east). While the US is without doubt the biggest influence on the UK (and the world) I think the gap is great, and if it's decreasing it's by inches, not miles. The sad fact is that most Briglish people (which I'm not remember - I like to think I'm impartial in this ) despite embrassing all of its trappings (and holidaying there in their droves) express a keen dislike for all things american. (personally I think it's a national form of penis-envy) But they do it to Europe as well, so it ain't personal. And difference is good. I abhore the thought of some culturally and enthnicly homogenous world ( not that it will ever happen. I think there's good science to demonstate people are different for a reason). Anyways, peace and love. maybe my post was a bit snappy. But I enjoy debate and I wasn't offended/angry.
I'm trying to find the article now Sandra about Dave not going, but its going to take me a little while as its buried in a bunch of posts at the classic rock forum I belong to. Bare with me.
As for Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five,,,isnt that enough for anybody? No, I really thought there were of those type of artists already elected, but I didnt check. Its still sad.
David Lee Roth has spat the dummy with Hall Of Fame officials and has pulled the plug on appearing at the ceremony! LA Times writer Geoff Boucher states in an article today that Michael Anthony will be the only original member of the band to appear at the ceremony, appearing along with second vocalist and friend Sammy Hagar.
The LA Time article is as follows: Roth not allowed to perform at gala honoring the band Of the original band, only deposed bassist Michael Anthony will appear at the induction ceremony. By Geoff Boucher, Times Staff Writer March 9, 2007 - Van Halen's road plans have taken a rocky turn How did that old Van Halen song go? "I found the simple life ain't so simple ... " The iconic Los Angeles metal band is set to be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame at a lavish New York banquet Monday night, but now it appears that only one original member, bassist Michael Anthony, will even show up. David Lee Roth, the band's frontman for its first decade, said Thursday he will not attend the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel ceremony because event officials have turned down his repeated overtures to perform. "I don't make speeches for a living; I sing and dance for my dinner," Roth said, adding that the decision to skip the event "rips my heart out."The hall of fame's event organizers plan for Velvet Revolver to perform some Van Halen classics, much as Metallica stood in last year to play Black Sabbath songs while that band's members watched from the audience. "So it appears this is a television producer's decision," Roth said. The choice of Velvet Revolver was in response to a sticky situation as far as what lineup of Van Halen could take the stage to perform with Roth. Van Halen's revered guitar hero, Eddie Van Halen, and his brother, drummer Alex, had already sent signals that they would not be in New York. The Van Halen's have been in lock-down mode since their plans for a summer reunion tour with Roth collapsed last month. Roth said he last spoke to Eddie Van Halen's camp a week ago, and he said he could not determine the truth about reports that the guitarist is seeking help for alcohol problems. "Ed is indisposed and working toward a better future here," Roth said. "If Ed ever dries up, this is going to be a stadium act, man.... What's happening here with this [New York event] is part and parcel of the same spiral that screwed up the tour." Without the Brothers Van Halen, the Hall faced the prospect of putting Roth on stage with bass player Michael Anthony, who is the lone founding member expected to attend, and Sammy Hagar, Roth's replacement in the band and longtime foil, who logged more than a decade as the band's frontman. Hagar confirmed Thursday he is attending. Roth said Thursday he had been preparing since December for the chance to perform for the industry elite, the media and a television audience that will be watching the ceremony live on VH1 Classics. "It's just not an option for me to go and watch some other band — who are only performing because they have some new record coming out — do our music," Roth said. "I have nothing against Velvet Revolver — I'm not familiar with their music — but that was my 3 minutes and 22 seconds up there." The other inductees this year are R.E.M., Patti Smith, Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five, and the Ronettes. The 2007 inductees were chosen by the 600 voters of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation. Artists are eligible for inclusion in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame 25 years after their first recording was released. The ceremony will also be streamed live on AOL.
I want ot clearify my position with VH too although I was never too much of a fan. My outlook is that they are a band that had some great records and success with two different frontmen for 10 to 15 years or so. Thats a damn fine career and they are a hugely famous band with some songs that might survive musical immortality. My only complaint is that (like GNR's Chinese Democracy) I hate all the squabbling within their ranks and having to hear about reunions every week for the last 15 years. Either do it or dont, but more importantly, dont look like a fool when making the decision. Eddie looks like a clown anymore and needs serious help. If I was Alex, i'd lock him up in a rehab clinic for his own good. Just my opinion.
I want ot clearify my position with VH too although I was never too much of a fan. My outlook is that they are a band that had some great records and success with two different frontmen for 10 to 15 years or so. Thats a damn fine career and they are a hugely famous band with some songs that might survive musical immortality. My only complaint is that (like GNR's Chinese Democracy) I hate all the squabbling within their ranks and having to hear about reunions every week for the last 15 years. Either do it or dont, but more importantly, dont look like a fool when making the decision. Eddie looks like a clown anymore and needs serious help. If I was Alex, i'd lock him up in a rehab clinic for his own good. Just my opinion.
It's been done... And that's the reason EVH wasn't at the HOF...the rehab clinic didn't give him permission to attend the ceremony...
Whoa Sandra. I had hoped my smiley face indicated that I wasn't overly offended. Just boxing for my corner, that's all. The US RHoF's own blurb states: "The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame honors the legendary performers, producers, songwriters, disc jockeys and others who have made rock and roll the force that it is in our culture." No mention of innovation or groundbreaking being required. I think Hall of FAME says it all. However she's done it, she is THE most famous woman in rock. (just as an example Tom Petty's in there - he's no innovator. Just well liked and sold sh8t load of records) I can see why Robbie is controversial but longevity can't be a qualifier either because he's had a recording career longer than The Beatles. And he's HUGE in the UK and europe. I'll take your word on the guidelines thing - I have no idea - but you can see how I wouldn't have got that from your original post. Not everyone in the UK thinks Van Halen are ridiculous. I'm sure they'd fill Wembley Arena a few times over. Sorry - I think there is a cultural gap between our two nations. And any cross-atlantic influences is definately one way (west to east). While the US is without doubt the biggest influence on the UK (and the world) I think the gap is great, and if it's decreasing it's by inches, not miles. The sad fact is that most Briglish people (which I'm not remember - I like to think I'm impartial in this ) despite embrassing all of its trappings (and holidaying there in their droves) express a keen dislike for all things american. (personally I think it's a national form of penis-envy) But they do it to Europe as well, so it ain't personal. And difference is good. I abhore the thought of some culturally and enthnicly homogenous world ( not that it will ever happen. I think there's good science to demonstate people are different for a reason). Anyways, peace and love. maybe my post was a bit snappy. But I enjoy debate and I wasn't offended/angry.
Yeah, I got a little carried away there. You do have a way of getting me going! But I was just debating back. No anger or anything. It's why I visit forums anyway. To discuss stuff. It just gets me about this American mentality and British mentality thing. I don't think it's that easy. We're individuals. The labeling thing is what keeps people apart. Gives them a reason to hate. Especially when it's based on nothing. It always makes me laugh about Europeans expressing hatred for all things American when they go around listening to our music, wearing our styles, speaking our slang, watching our movies and eating our fast food! Come on! But of course we're different. I mean even within a persons own country there are differences from one region to another. When I moved from New York to Arizona there was a certain amount of culture shock! I couldn't get out of there fast enough. But I think basically, at the core, we're all very similar. Anyway, I find this all very fascinating. It's so ingrained in us from WAY back. I found an interesting article on it but from the reverse angle and how the influence isn't just one sided anymore. If anyone's interested here it is: (I love the line about America's efforts to subvert European civilization. Especially the French. That's so funny. )
When Daimler-Benz and Chrysler announced in May that they were merging, I received a telephone call from a reporter for The Detroit News. Did I think the merger was a threat to America's "identity?" he wanted to know. . This question might strike Europeans as bizarre. Why should Americans worry that their national identity was in jeopardy, just because a German auto company was taking over one of America's most familiar brand names? Europeans are supposed to be the ones who agonize about the American threat to their traditions and institutions, not the other way around. . In fact, complaints about America's cultural intrusiveness have been a European specialty since the dawn of the 20th century. In 1901, the British journalist William Stead published a book called "The Americanization of the World." . As early as the 1920s, European writers warned their readers about the poisonous influence of American movies, advertising, and jazz. In the 1940s, they suspected that the Marshall Plan's secret intention was to turn Western Europe into a replica of the United States. In the 1980s, they insisted that "Dallas" and McDonald's were the chief instruments of America's cultural imperialism. In the 1990s, they pointed to the opening of a Disney theme park near Paris as the latest example of America's efforts to subvert European (and especially French) civilization. . So the current assertion that Tony Blair or Gerhard Schroeder are clones of Bill Clinton, or that their desire to shrink the postwar European welfare state is a surrender to the American economic model, has its roots in 100 years of European antagonism toward, or ambivalence about, the United States. The fear that America represents a danger to Europe's independence is not new. . What is new is the realization that Europe may be having just as powerful an impact on America's economy and cultural tastes. Americans today are as affected by European fashions and ideas as Europeans are entranced by American technology and mass entertainment. . Nowhere is Europe's influence greater than in the American academic world. Since the 1970s, American scholars have looked to Britain, France and Germany for the most advanced theories, methods and terminologies. You cannot walk into an English department at an American university without encountering postmodernists, post-structuralists, deconstructionists and practitioners of "cultural studies," all of these techniques (along with the jargon) imported from Europe. Nor will you find a history department whose stars are not disciples of European gurus such as Antonio Gramsci and Michel Foucault. . The majority of Americans, however, are less intoxicated by Europe's academic culture than by its clothes, furnishings, glassware and cuisine. And, whether they know it or not, by Europe's cinematic traditions. It is true that Hollywood dominates the global film market. But the American movie industry has always been shaped by British and European influences — from the immigrant entrepreneurs who created the major studios; to the genius of a Charlie Chaplin or Cary Grant; to the French film critics of the 1950s who taught American audiences about the centrality of the director as auteur; to the recent popularity in the United States of movies such as "Il Postino" and "The Full Monty." . Then there is the question of European corporations purchasing American properties. Daimler-Benz's absorption of Chrysler is only one example. Bertelsmann — one of the largest German publishing houses and media companies — has taken over Doubleday, Bantam, and Dell, and now Random House. Pierson Ltd., a British media conglomerate, is buying Simon & Schuster. Hachette — France's leading book and magazine publisher — helps finance "George," the slick monthly published by John F. Kennedy Jr. . Such investments are a sign that while Americans still determine the content of mass culture, they no longer control the economics of the worldwide information and entertainment industries. . The spectacle of Europeans buying American corporations and publishing houses and magazines does not imply that America's values or its economic practices are being altered. European entrepreneurs have entered the American market to make money, not to trigger a cultural revolution. Bertelsmann, Pierson, and Hachette accommodate themselves to the appetites of their American audiences. So, too, will Daimler-Benz. . What these developments do suggest is that Americans and Europeans are living in a world that is growing not homogeneous but increasingly eclectic. And that the century-long European dread of becoming Americanized is as exaggerated as America's new anxieties about the European menace to its national identity. . The writer, a Fulbright professor at Bonn University, is the author of "Not Like Us: How Europeans Have Loved, Hated, and Transformed American Culture Since World War II." He contributed this comment to the International Herald Tribune. When Daimler-Benz and Chrysler announced in May that they were merging, I received a telephone call from a reporter for The Detroit News. Did I think the merger was a threat to America's "identity?" he wanted to know. . This question might strike Europeans as bizarre. Why should Americans worry that their national identity was in jeopardy, just because a German auto company was taking over one of America's most familiar brand names? Europeans are supposed to be the ones who agonize about the American threat to their traditions and institutions, not the other way around. . In fact, complaints about America's cultural intrusiveness have been a European specialty since the dawn of the 20th century. In 1901, the British journalist William Stead published a book called "The Americanization of the World." . As early as the 1920s, European writers warned their readers about the poisonous influence of American movies, advertising, and jazz. In the 1940s, they suspected that the Marshall Plan's secret intention was to turn Western Europe into a replica of the United States. In the 1980s, they insisted that "Dallas" and McDonald's were the chief instruments of America's cultural imperialism. In the 1990s, they pointed to the opening of a Disney theme park near Paris as the latest example of America's efforts to subvert European (and especially French) civilization. . So the current assertion that Tony Blair or Gerhard Schroeder are clones of Bill Clinton, or that their desire to shrink the postwar European welfare state is a surrender to the American economic model, has its roots in 100 years of European antagonism toward, or ambivalence about, the United States. The fear that America represents a danger to Europe's independence is not new. . What is new is the realization that Europe may be having just as powerful an impact on America's economy and cul- . tural tastes. Americans today are as affected by European fashions and ideas as Europeans are entranced by American technology and mass entertainment. . Nowhere is Europe's influence greater than in the American academic world. Since the 1970s, American scholars have looked to Britain, France and Germany for the most advanced theories, methods and terminologies. You cannot walk into an English department at an American university without encountering postmodernists, post-structuralists, deconstructionists and practitioners of "cultural studies," all of these techniques (along with the jargon) imported from Europe. Nor will you find a history department whose stars are not disciples of European gurus such as Antonio Gramsci and Michel Foucault. . The majority of Americans, however, are less intoxicated by Europe's academic culture than by its clothes, furnishings, glassware and cuisine. And, whether they know it or not, by Europe's cinematic traditions. It is true that Hollywood dominates the global film market. But the American movie industry has always been shaped by British and European influences — from the immigrant entrepreneurs who created the major studios; to the genius of a Charlie Chaplin or Cary Grant; to the French film critics of the 1950s who taught American audiences about the centrality of the director as auteur; to the recent popularity in the United States of movies such as "Il Postino" and "The Full Monty." . Then there is the question of European corporations purchasing American properties. Daimler-Benz's absorption of Chrysler is only one example. Bertelsmann — one of the largest German publishing houses and media companies — has taken over Doubleday, Bantam, and Dell, and now Random House. Pierson Ltd., a British media conglomerate, is buying Simon & Schuster. Hachette — France's leading book and magazine publisher — helps finance "George," the slick monthly published by John F. Kennedy Jr. . Such investments are a sign that while Americans still determine the content of mass culture, they no longer control the economics of the worldwide information and entertainment industries. . The spectacle of Europeans buying American corporations and publishing houses and magazines does not imply that America's values or its economic practices are being altered. European entrepreneurs have entered the American mar- . ket to make money, not to trigger a cultural revolution. Bertelsmann, Pierson, and Hachette accommodate themselves to the appetites of their American audiences. So, too, will Daimler-Benz. . What these developments do suggest is that Americans and Europeans are living in a world that is growing not homogeneous but increasingly eclectic. And that the century-long European dread of becoming Americanized is as exaggerated as America's new anxieties about the European menace to its national identity.
Ha. You're right, we always do get off on the wrong foot. But it always ends up good in the end. Bugger me if I know whether we're agreeing or disagreeing now. Have you read PJ O'Rourke? His anti-european rants are hilarious. He was my hero for awhile. I'm gonna read your post properly later (I'm at work.) Just for the record - I like america and americans. I like your (mostly) friendly, positive, get up and go attitude. Until very recently I truly thought you were the best possible future (not perfect mind) that the world had ever had. Unfortunately Bush (with Blairs help) has taken that away from me. Sad really. I remember being so happy when the Cold War ended, I really fell for that "end of history" line. Now - I don't know, maybe we're just doomed to this cycle of crisis and suspicion. Not that I think the world's that bad a place anyway - the sun manages to shine most days and fate has chosen to put me in a place that's safe, warm, and sometimes even fun. Can't ask for much more than that. I'm not going to spend my life worrying.
Yeah, Bush hasn't helped us in the popularity department around the world that's for sure. But you can see that most American's are vocally dissatisfied with him and are hungry for a change. I think the next election year will be one of the most exciting elections this country has ever seen. We have a woman and an African American in the running. Finally a little diversity. Then there's Guliani. I'm excited about his running. Mainly for stupid reasons like his being a New York Italian like most of my family! But when I think of what he did for NYC I can't help but be interested in what he has to say. Anyway, a change is on the way for us and I'm excited. However, I think it will be a miracle if a woman or African American gets elected. Unfortunately this country still has deep rooted issues with stuff like that. Certainly doesn't make me proud.
BTW, I don't know if we're agreeing now or not either. Doesn't really matter though. It's all good!
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
Revolution
Male
Female
Logged
