Hip-Hop Hall of Fame Museum to Open in New York

[Shaka Zulu]

Hip-hop history continues to grow as it approaches its fourth decade, and the greats of the rap, b-boy and graffiti scenes are set to get their due in New York via the opening of the tributary Hip Hop Hall of Fame Museum in Midtown Manhattan and Harlem.

Hip-Hop Hall of Fame Museum to Open in New York

About time this happened, I say (except for the detail of rock and roll fans screaming that this should have happened a long time ago and that rap/hip-hop should now be kicked out of the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame.)

Here's a video about it:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Itje9FO_4Dg[/yt]

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Definitely a great idea. I don't know about strictly kicking hip-hop out of the rock and roll hall of fame because there's often overlap. But it definitely deserves to be voted on by people who love the genre and not just by people who feel an obligation to include it.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Well, they did name it the Rock & Roll HOF. If they'd named it the Music HOF or Modern Music HOF, it would've been another story.

As a lifelong rock & metal fan, there are a few rap groups I kinda like, but they don't belong in a Rock HOF, no matter how good they are.

But the Rock HOF has a lot of problems other than the inclusion of rap & R&B artists.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I'm a fan of rap in general but I'm not a fan of the gangster or overly vulgar lyrics. I love Public Enemy, De La Soul, Eric B & Rakim, A Tribe Called Quest, Eminem, Outkast. There's a lot of rap albums I like but try to ignore the lyrics that are about murdering people or objectifying women, like for Run The Jewels' album this year I always skip the song that's just '**** in her mouth all day' over and over.

Rock and Roll HOF is named 'Rock and Roll' but they've never strictly limited themselves to rock. Tons of pop is on the list, tons of R&B. It's more an 'American pop hall of fame'.

 

[gblews]

Well, they did name it the Rock & Roll HOF. If they'd named it the Music HOF or Modern Music HOF, it would've been another story.
.

No, it really wouldn't have been. Prior to, I'de say about, the 1970's pop music wasn't nearly as segregated by categories as it is today. Had the RnR HOF been founded in the 50's or 60's it is unlikely anyone would have disagreed with the inclusion of The Four Seasons, The Temptations etc alongside Elvis, Little Richard, etc.

I blame radio in general and specifically, rock radio, for using commentary and their playlists to imply that if a popular song didn't meet certain criteria like guitars mixed out front, no keyboards or strings and horns, and the like, was't real rock and roll.

So these days most people take the categories for granted, particularly, but not exclusively, those born after the 70's. Rock and roll has always encompassed all kinds of popular music.

 

[Owain Taggart]

No, it really wouldn't have been. Prior to, I'de say about, the 1970's pop music wasn't nearly as segregated by categories as it is today. Had the RnR HOF been founded in the 50's or 60's it is unlikely anyone would have disagreed with the inclusion of The Four Seasons, The Temptations etc alongside Elvis, Little Richard, etc.

Yes, and I think it's important to note that there was a lot of overlap back then too. A lot of what people consider Rock actually got its start as Honky-Tonk, which is especially noticeable in Elvis' early days as a singer. Gospel also had a lot of influence.

I blame radio in general and specifically, rock radio, for using commentary and their playlists to imply that if a popular song didn't meet certain criteria like guitars mixed out front, no keyboards or strings and horns, and the like, was't real rock and roll.

A favourite band of mine in the mid-90's got refused to be played on a major rock radio station in Toronto because they didn't fit the conventions of what 'Rock' is simply by the instruments they played. But they could rock out just as well as anyone. They got relegated to being played on CMT when they technically didn't really belong there either. They never played more conventional instruments until later in their career.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Well, they did name it the Rock & Roll HOF. If they'd named it the Music HOF or Modern Music HOF, it would've been another story.

As a lifelong rock & metal fan, there are a few rap groups I kinda like, but they don't belong in a Rock HOF, no matter how good they are.

But the Rock HOF has a lot of problems other than the inclusion of rap & R&B artists.

It's the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. As others have said the earliest Rock and Roll music covered a lot of territory and influences, including country and western, rhythm and blues, gospel and folk. To me Rock and Roll is an attitude not just a type of music.

 

[CorporalClegg]

To mean "rock and roll" is just another name for contemporary music.

The thing is, if we actually break it down to the subgenres as they're identified by academia, then "rock and roll" refers to a very specific style of music that doesn't even include the Beatles.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Well, they did name it the Rock & Roll HOF. If they'd named it the Music HOF or Modern Music HOF, it would've been another story.

As a lifelong rock & metal fan, there are a few rap groups I kinda like, but they don't belong in a Rock HOF, no matter how good they are.

But the Rock HOF has a lot of problems other than the inclusion of rap & R&B artists.

It's the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. As others have said the earliest Rock and Roll music covered a lot of territory and influences, including country and western, rhythm and blues, gospel and folk. To me Rock and Roll is an attitude not just a type of music.

To mean "rock and roll" is just another name for contemporary music.

The thing is, if we actually break it down to the subgenres as they're identified by academia, then "rock and roll" refers to a very specific style of music that doesn't even include the Beatles.

Damn straight.

 

[Lynx]

^^
You're right about that CorporalClegg and I see that Syd Barret is in your avatar!

Rock'n' Roll was what artists like Bill Haley and Elvis were labeled as. Chuck Berry was playing Rythm 'n' Blues.

Then when the Beatles, Stones and all of them came along, they were labeled as "pop".

Even heavier acts like Jimi Hendrix Experience, Cream and Yardbirds were labeled as "pop". A relative of mine who is a fan of the band Traffic has a bootleg from a Swedish concert where they are announced as "the English pop group Traffic". Despite a few little catchy tunes, they were far from "pop".

At the end of the 60's, the more heavy acts, including the Stones were labeled as "rock". Then came "progressive rock" which developed into "hard rock" or "heavy rock" and then developed into "heavy metal"

Unfortunately, some not so well educated music journalists today refer to a lot of different styles as "rock". Then they write about "retro" which actually is the real "rock" in it's 60's-70's meaning.

Bands like Bon Jovi, Guns n Roses and Black Crowes are actually "rock" while those photo models which the 12-13 year old girls seem to love are more correctly referred to as "pop".

Miley Cyrus "rock"? No way!

As for the hip-hop hall of fame, why not? It's a style of it's own. Personally I can't stand it but obviously there are a lot of people who does. So let them have their own celebrations.

While I continue to listen to more "rock"-oriented things from Beatles and Stones to Iron Maiden and Metallica.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Chuck Berry was playing Rythm 'n' Blues.

Yet Chuck wrote song called "Rock and Roll Music" and folks thought Elvis was black when they heard him on the radio.

 

[Owain Taggart]

To me Rock and Roll is an attitude not just a type of music.

That's a great way of putting it.

As parents from back in those days would call it 'Noise'. "What in all damnation is that infernal racket? Turn off the devil's music!" Teenagers of the day likened to it as something new and bold, converging as a result of all those early styles of music, and those teens often rebelling against their parents wishes and using this music as a status symbol and attitude. You could say it was as much an attitude as it was a movement that swept the nation.

I've been playing a game set in the 40's and 50's with all the period specific music, and I find it to be a rather interesting excersize as it forces one to see it through their lense. You start to appreciate just how everything came together in terms of music. It's definitely not as clear-cut as one would have it now. It was much more inclusive. And yet, those musicians were blazing a new path.

Here's a fascinating flowchart demonstrating the influences in Rock music:

http://www.concerthotels.com/100-years-of-rock/

 

[gblews]

To mean "rock and roll" is just another name for contemporary music.

This is exactly what rock and roll from it's introduction to the masses through the mid 70's when the term began to be narrowed into what it is today.

^^
You're right about that CorporalClegg and I see that Syd Barret is in your avatar!

Rock'n' Roll was what artists like Bill Haley and Elvis were labeled as. Chuck Berry was playing Rythm 'n' Blues.

The music Chuck Berry, Bill Haley, Little Richard, Carl Perkins, etc made ALL fit under the rock and roll umbrella.

"Rock and roll" (a slang term meaning sexual intercourse believed to have been picked up from black DJ's down south), was applied to the "new" music being enjoyed by young people in the early 50's.

Even heavier acts like Jimi Hendrix Experience, Cream and Yardbirds were labeled as "pop". A relative of mine who is a fan of the band Traffic has a bootleg from a Swedish concert where they are announced as "the English pop group Traffic". Despite a few little catchy tunes, they were far from "pop".

This is not a surprise. The Swedish announcer wasn't incorrect, just not as specific as he could have been. The bands you mention above were making "popular" music. As I have been trying to point out, the labels and categories many are so comfortable with today only came about relatively recently and simply are not historically accurate.

Unfortunately, some not so well educated music journalists today refer to a lot of different styles as "rock". Then they write about "retro" which actually is the real "rock" in it's 60's-70's meaning.

Bands like Bon Jovi, Guns n Roses and Black Crowes are actually "rock" while those photo models which the 12-13 year old girls seem to love are more correctly referred to as "pop".

Miley Cyrus "rock"? No way!

Under the broad original definition of rock and roll, Miley Cyrus would definetly fit as a rock act. The definition of RnR has never been, "wimpy music that I don't like".

There are several artists in the Hall that I don't think belong, but it's not because "they don't play rock". One thing the Hall has gotten completely right is that RnR has always had a MUCH broader definition than many fans (and some music journalists) today are aware of.

 

[the G-man]

At its most basic, rock and roll is a marriage of country and blues. As such, one expects there should be some overlap between the genres.

That being said, not all hit music post-1955 qualifies as rock and roll. If you can't draw reasonable distinctions, or if you make the definition too broad in order to encompass what acts you think are popular, the term has no meaning. You might as well just call it "the post-Elvis Pop Music Hall of Fame."

In any event, I suspect that most people criticizing the inclusion of rap and dance acts in the hall of fame wouldn't be so critical, were it not for the fact that a number of rock acts that should clearly be in the HoF (Ex: Deep Purple, Dire Straits, Joe Cocker, Warren Zevon, the Replacements) have been snubbed in favor of artists (Ex: ABBA, Donna Summer, Jimmy Cliff, NWA) who--while clearly talented-- don't fit the genre.

And why the hell is Wanda Jackson inducted only as an "early influence," a distinction normally given to extremely influential, but pre-rock and roll, acts like Jimmy Rogers, Hank Williams and Howlin' Wolf. Jackson was the "queen of rockabilly," and a more or less contemporary to the Sun Records "million dollar quartet" that is generally considered the freshman class of rock and roll. Relegating her to "early influence" status would be like relegating Chuck Berry and Buddy Holly to that status.

 

[Owain Taggart]

"Rock and roll" (a slang term meaning sexual intercourse believed to have been picked up from black DJ's down south), was applied to the "new" music being enjoyed by young people in the early 50's.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread has got me thinking. It seems like the 50's is what gave rise to musical personalities , ie the kind of band we know now with a marketable lead, with Elvis being one of the firsts to market themselves as part of a new generation. Before that, it seems they were marketed more as ensembles. The whole change seems to go in line with the change in attitude.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I don't know. I think they're just like the contemporary version of opera divas.

 

[Nerys Myk]

"Rock and roll" (a slang term meaning sexual intercourse believed to have been picked up from black DJ's down south), was applied to the "new" music being enjoyed by young people in the early 50's.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread has got me thinking. It seems like the 50's is what gave rise to musical personalities , ie the kind of band we know now with a marketable lead, with Elvis being one of the firsts to market themselves as part of a new generation. Before that, it seems they were marketed more as ensembles. The whole change seems to go in line with the change in attitude.

I think guys like Sinatra and Crosby were quite marketable. Sinatra being the Elvis of his generation.

 

[the G-man]

"Rock and roll" (a slang term meaning sexual intercourse believed to have been picked up from black DJ's down south), was applied to the "new" music being enjoyed by young people in the early 50's.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread has got me thinking. It seems like the 50's is what gave rise to musical personalities , ie the kind of band we know now with a marketable lead, with Elvis being one of the firsts to market themselves as part of a new generation. Before that, it seems they were marketed more as ensembles. The whole change seems to go in line with the change in attitude.

I think guys like Sinatra and Crosby were quite marketable. Sinatra being the Elvis of his generation.

...and before them, Enrique Caruso and (especially) Al Jolson.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

A lot of the early jazz and blues guys were pretty marketable too. And Mozart was a pretty big celebrity in his day.

 

[martok2112]

Pass