• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Rap Music Should Be Included In Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame

Rap is not Rock... Rap is Rap and to some its cRap. Fuckin' rappers do not belong in the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame. They are not Rock N Roll. Why not induct Gustav Mahler, or Leon Redbone or Yanni into the fuckin' ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME?! FUCKWADS.

JUST SAY NO.

I love it when people do driveby posts that show they haven't read any of the discussion, and make points that have been refuted several times over. It just adds so much to the experience.

An uninformed opinion is a worthless opinion.
 
I guess you really didn't read my post. Maybe you think I was responding to your comment. I wasn't. I presented the list in response to Dusty's response to your comment.

My point is that the RnR HoF does not appear to have any racial bigotry to date.

And no one in this thread has said or even implied the Hall of Fame has shown any racism in past choices. Did you read the whole thread before posting your comment? Because you would see by his comments in this thread that Dusty wouldn't be the one to imply anything like that.


FWIW, I was not trying to prove that the RnR HoF has no racial bias against RAP artists, but simply demonstrating that, contrary to a possible meaning in Dusty's comment, the RnR HoF has no racial bias, because they have included many excellent African-American Rock and Roll artists (from day 1).

Then you're trying to "prove" something that no one here has disputed. Basically, you're arguing with yourself, making your post a non sequitur.
 
Yes, it's called an analogy and is a perfectly acceptable way of proving a point. The point of the analogies, since you don't seem to have grasped it, is that labeling things something which they aren't is dumb and misleading. In fact, in some cases it's a crime.

I know what an "analogy" is, and "inducting rap artists into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is like showing porn to kids" is a terrible one.

Well if that one doesn't work for you for whatever reason go with the former analogy and not the latter. :rolleyes:
 
There are no moral or criminal aspects to having rap in a rock hall of fame, for a start. It really is a bad analogy.
 
...but you wouldn't personally organize a video rental place by putting the porn in the childrens section, would you? No, you wouldn't. Similarly rap and rock do not belong in the same hall of fame unless it's a hybrid band. Thus, the analogy works even if it's a bit of a stretch. I'm sorry if you have a problem following my logic. :confused:

At any rate this crap is all off topic. I don't want to derail the thread.
 
...but you wouldn't personally organize a video rental place by putting the porn in the childrens section, would you? No, you wouldn't, similarly rap and rock do not belong in the same hall of fame unless it's a hybrid band. Thus, the analogy works even if it's a bit of a stretch. I'm sorry if you have a problem following my logic. :confused:

Except for the fact that, as has already been proven, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has a more inclusive definition of Rock and Roll that already includes soul, R&B, funk, jazz, reggae, pop, singer-songwriter, and rap artists.
 
Exactly, and there's something very wrong with that.

Why? Rock and roll has always been a bastard hybrid genre, with its roots in jump blues, R&B, country, folk, pop, and jazz. It's always been about drawing on influences from every kind of music imaginable, and in turn influences other styles of music. Why should something that celebrates rock and roll restrict itself to a lowest common denominator definition of it?

And, returning to a question asked a few times but rarely answered: why does it matter who's included in the Hall of Fame? Who really pays attention to that anyway?
 
Exactly, and there's something very wrong with that.


Are you being serious with that statement? Because if you are that's kinda' sad. For fucks sake, it's just music and it's just a hall of fame, it's not like they murdered your parents in front of you or they're gang raping virgins for sport.
 
The perception seems to be that it is a historic institution that is grossly negligent of its own purpose, whereas in reality it is just a "Popular Music Hall of Fame" with a poorly conceived name.

I suggest people get over it.
 
Exactly, and there's something very wrong with that.


Are you being serious with that statement? Because if you are that's kinda' sad. For fucks sake, it's just music and it's just a hall of fame, it's not like they murdered your parents in front of you or they're gang raping virgins for sport.

Level of seriousness: about 60%, with the rest apathy.

How do you define Rock and Roll? it was a pretty loosely defined term at the beginning. Almost anything popular with kids was "Rock and Roll".
A large combination of of factors such as instruments used, beat, tempo, tone, the style of singing, etc. Music is damn hard to explain in words, but is rather something that is "heard".
 
Last edited:
Exactly, and there's something very wrong with that.


Are you being serious with that statement? Because if you are that's kinda' sad. For fucks sake, it's just music and it's just a hall of fame, it's not like they murdered your parents in front of you or they're gang raping virgins for sport.

Level of seriousness: about 60%, with apathy.

How do you define Rock and Roll? it was a pretty loosely defined term at the beginning. Almost anything popular with kids was "Rock and Roll".

A large combination of of factors such as instruments used, beat, tempo, tone, the style of singing, etc. Music is damn hard to explain in words, but is rather something that is "heard".
But there are a wide variety of those in music labeled "Rock and Roll". As I said up thread Rock and Roll is an attitude.
 
Exactly, and there's something very wrong with that.

Your list of favourite bands makes it a bit easier to see where you're coming from. From my perspective, there's very little stylistic diversity there. There's hard rock and heavy metal and not much else. It's not reflective of how diverse rock and roll, even by restrictive definitions, is. There's no rockabilly, no 60s rock, no psychedelic rock, no garage rock, no art rock, no progressive rock, no folk rock, no punk, nothing that would have been considered alternative before that was co-opted as a marketing term for postgrunge hard rock... and nothing nonrock at all.
 
I don't have to like the band to classify it as rock. Diversity of my album collection, which is what that's based on, isn't really an indication of all that I listen to either.

Also I'm a child of the 80s so what I listen to is usually stuff I've discovered or been exposed to from when I was alive for my 27 years. I can't really help it if I stick to what I like most of the time (hard rock and metal) and my list of favorites isn't well rounded enough for you.
 
Last edited:
But it explains a lot. As a rock fan I've found some of the most closed minded music fans are those who listen to hard rock/heavy metal and classical music fans.

Not that all who listen to these genres are closed minded just that I encounter it in them more than in any others.
 
^ The second sentence of that post has some truth. The first most certainly does not, and is a ludicrous statement. :lol:
It's ludicrous because rock died a long time ago. Well, I shouldn't say that. It's just been in a coma for a long, long time. It might come back one of these days. :lol:
 
But it explains a lot. As a rock fan I've found some of the most closed minded music fans are those who listen to hard rock/heavy metal and classical music fans.

Not that all who listen to these genres are closed minded just that I encounter it in them more than in any others.
Probably because they get so much shit from self-righteous hipsters about their musical tastes. I'm a huge metal fan, but I listen to a wide variety of other genres. Even so, it irks me when people get all condescending about my metalness. It makes me want to say "Fuck everything but metal" as a knee-jerk reaction.:lol:
 
Good God... Poison, Def Leppard, Quiet Riot, Pat Benatar, Bon Jovi, Billy Idol, Twisted Sister? In the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? You'd be lucky to find anyone who knows more than 1 or 2 Quiet Riot songs.

I would guess the Hall of Fame defines rock and roll as more of a spirit than any particular sound. "Rock and roll" is all about rebelling against authority and conformity, introducing new sounds and new ideas into pop music, having some influence on society, and inspiring other artists. From that perspective, NWA and Public Enemy are 1000 times more rock and roll than the guys who wrote "Pour Some Sugar on Me".
Bon Jovi's earned a place as far as I'm concerned, and in the beginning, Twisted Sister had a lot more credibility than they ended up having by the mid-to-late '80s. They were initially kind of like a louder, uglier version of the New York Dolls before they went pop and turned into just another crappy hair band.
 
^ The second sentence of that post has some truth. The first most certainly does not, and is a ludicrous statement. :lol:
It's ludicrous because rock died a long time ago. Well, I shouldn't say that. It's just been in a coma for a long, long time. It might come back one of these days. :lol:

I'm not sure I agree with that. Just looking at your favourite band list, plenty of thse bands have put out fantastic albums in the last few years, some of them are doing the best stuff of their lives IMO (Maiden for instance).

Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains and Them Crooked Vultures have all put out tremendous albums just in the last couple of months
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top