Hall and Oates

Post by **Sabo** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:33 am

Hall of Famers, MFers.

They're going in with some other lesser-known acts, like KISS, Peter Gabriel, Nirvana and some Muslim guy.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:35 am

Hmmm. I have a hard time thinking Hall and Oates or KISS is worthy. I would rate KISS higher because of their live shows being a big part of their draw.

Speaking of KISS, Ace Frehley's house burned down. So weird, because he's a few years behind on taxes and it was about to go into foreclosure. What a coincidence!

wlu_lax6 · Post by **wlu_lax6** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:59 am

AB_skin_test wrote:Hmmm. I have a hard time thinking Hall and Oates or KISS is worthy. I would rate KISS higher because of their live shows being a big part of their draw.

Speaking of KISS, Ace Frehley's house burned down. So weird, because he's a few years behind on taxes and it was about to go into foreclosure. What a coincidence!

USA Today wrote: KISS bassist Gene Simmons and co-founder guitarist Paul Stanley have insisted that original members lead guitarist Ace Frehley and drummer Peter Criss will not be permitted to perform at the ceremony

Also would have figured N.W.A. would have made it in this time.

rass · Post by **rass** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:00 am

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:10 am

AB_skin_test wrote:Hmmm. I have a hard time thinking Hall and Oates or KISS is worthy. I would rate KISS higher because of their live shows being a big part of their draw.

Yes, with such incredible acts as the Lovin Spoonful, The Ronettes, Leonard Cohen, and Patti Smith already in there, why is one of the most iconic bands in history getting inducted?

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:11 am

"Oh oh here she comes,
Watch out boy, she'll chew you up.
Oh oh here she comes,
She's a maneater"

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:29 am

When I was little I really thought their name was Haulin' Oates.

rass · Post by **rass** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:36 am

Jerloma wrote:
AB_skin_test wrote:Hmmm. I have a hard time thinking Hall and Oates or KISS is worthy. I would rate KISS higher because of their live shows being a big part of their draw.
Yes, with such incredible acts as the Lovin Spoonful, The Ronettes, Leonard Cohen, and Patti Smith already in there, why is one of the most iconic bands in history getting inducted?

If for nothing else, they should be in just for their pioneering use of makeup in crafting rock and roll personas:

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:43 am

Jerloma wrote:
AB_skin_test wrote:Hmmm. I have a hard time thinking Hall and Oates or KISS is worthy. I would rate KISS higher because of their live shows being a big part of their draw.
Yes, with such incredible acts as the Lovin Spoonful, The Ronettes, Leonard Cohen, and Patti Smith already in there, why is one of the most iconic bands in history getting inducted?

I can't figure out if you are talking about Hall and Oates or KISS.

Edit: Always check for Rass responses first.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:46 am

Jerloma wrote:
AB_skin_test wrote:Hmmm. I have a hard time thinking Hall and Oates or KISS is worthy. I would rate KISS higher because of their live shows being a big part of their draw.
Yes, with such incredible acts as the Lovin Spoonful, The Ronettes, Leonard Cohen, and Patti Smith already in there, why is one of the most iconic bands in history getting inducted?

KISS was a boy band, effectively, for boys. As opposed to the poptwerps that aim at the 12-year old girl demographic, KISS aimed at the 12-year old boy market. While little girls were taping pictures of Donnie Osmond to their bedroom walls, the dumbest kids of my generation were taping to walls pictures of a male glam geisha extending his tongue while sporting styrofoam biceps, high heels and sparkle. And just like any other boy band, none of them are remotely noteworthy as musicians and not one of their song lyrics can be read without cringing from the sheer vapidness of it. The stage act was all they had. That's it. Nothing else.

Speaking of the hollowness of boys bands such as The Osmonds, examine this first bit of KISS lyrics I found on Yagoogloo:

I know a thing or two about her
I know she'll only make you cry
She'll let you walk the street beside her
But when she wants she'll pass you by

. . . it is impossible to claim that sort of adolescent dreck is any better than Beeber or Gaggy Lala or Leif Garrett or Donnie and Marie.

It doesn't matter what you wanna do
It doesn't matter where you wanna go
Just gotta decide girl and then you let me know

And you brought Leonard Cohen and Patti Smith into that conversation? Yikes.

You know that it's easy, so come on and please me
I want you
I'm needin' some lovin', I'm hot like an oven
It's so true

Even the shittiest and most forgettably derivative rappers are at least somewhat more clever. If KISS gets inducted to the R&RHOF, might as well induct The Bay City Rollers. And Shaun Cassidy. And Tiffany. And Menudo.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:47 am

And i would agree that the Rock n Roll hall of fame is incredibly watered down.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:09 pm

Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that Rush made it in before Kiss.

howard · Post by **howard** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:58 pm

Pruitt wrote:"Oh oh here she comes,
Watch out boy, she'll chew you up.
Oh oh here she comes,
She's a maneater"

I bet Toki thinks that is metal.

Is this the first Metalocalypse mention in the swamp? I love this show.

howard · Post by **howard** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:06 pm

I suppose we have to blame the Jackson 5ive for the invention of the boy band. While the quality of their songs and Michael's obvious great talent at age 11 clearly differentiates them from every single boy band to come.

Johnny Carwash · Post by **Johnny Carwash** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:53 pm

Anyone else up in arms that ELO isn't in?

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:51 pm

howard wrote:I suppose we have to blame the Jackson 5ive for the invention of the boy band. While the quality of their songs and Michael's obvious great talent at age 11 clearly differentiates them from every single boy band to come.

Ummm. The Beatles?

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:54 pm

I always considered boy bands to be ones that didn't play instruments, which would make both the Jacksons and Beatles actual bands but would also make the Jonas Brothers a real band so my argument falls apart pretty early.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:09 pm

Johnny Carwash wrote:Anyone else up in arms that ELO isn't in?

I had my ELO phase - maybe a year or so when I was convinced that they were the greatest band in the world.

Then I turned 13.

Johnny Carwash · Post by **Johnny Carwash** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:55 pm

I'll defend ELO to the death, or at least the general vicinity thereof. Them not being considered artistically accomplished enough for the R&RHOF is why I don't have much use for it, and "serious" critics of popular music in general.

By the way, the above video the is worst possible context to present an ELO song. This is the best:

howard · Post by **howard** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:47 pm

Rush2112 wrote:
howard wrote:I suppose we have to blame the Jackson 5ive for the invention of the boy band. While the quality of their songs and Michael's obvious great talent at age 11 clearly differentiates them from every single boy band to come.
Ummm. The Beatles?

Grown. Ass. Men. Their target audience was young adults, people their same age. Of course I get your point, and we could split the difference and go with the Monkees. I like Scottie's observation about KISS, and my grown-ass-men criteria would exclude KISS. And the Jackson Five targeted adults as well as adolescents. All depends on where we decide to draw the lines and definitions. I point to the Jackson Five primarily because when they started, most of them were literal boys, and they were extremely popular, and instantly copied (most notably by the Osmonds and the Partridge Family).

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:32 am

Rush2112 wrote:
howard wrote:I suppose we have to blame the Jackson 5ive for the invention of the boy band. While the quality of their songs and Michael's obvious great talent at age 11 clearly differentiates them from every single boy band to come.
Ummm. The Beatles?

Oh, for chrissakes. Rush, you have to be better than that. Boy bands are usually barely teenagers. The Beatles were in their twenties. Boy bands don't play instruments or write their own songs. New Kids on the Block/N'Sync/One Direction. Yecch.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:15 am

I don't know where you guys ever got the idea that Rock and Roll had to be so fucking erudite. It doesn't. Sometimes it just has to be fun. Make people move and smile. Comparing Kiss to Menudo is clinically insane. Put your snobby biases aside, listen to something like Detroit Rock City and tell me that's not Rock and Roll.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:19 am

Mr Blue Sky is my favorite ELO song.

Post by **Shirley** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:37 am

Boy Bands are corporate productions. They have tryouts, where managers select the group based largely on looks, then singing and dancing ability. The ability to play instruments or write music is pretty much irrelevant.

That's very different than real bands (where the band members essentially find each other) that happen to attract young fans.

I wouldn't consider the Jonas Brothers a true "boy band." They actually played their instruments (I think) and might even write their music (OK, I have no idea). The Beatles? ... that's just stinky troll bait.

I'm not sure where I'd put Kiss on that scale. I have never liked them, so I don't much about their origins, but I think they were a "real" band who discovered the makeup thing as a (very successful) gimmick, right? Clearly they were way more marketing than true music, but I don't think they were created in a corporate conference room, right?

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:59 am

sancarlos wrote: Oh, for chrissakes. Rush, you have to be better than that. Boy bands are usually barely teenagers. The Beatles were in their twenties. Boy bands don't play instruments or write their own songs. New Kids on the Block/N'Sync/One Direction. Yecch.

Lennon was the only one in their 20s (and he was 20) when they formed. At the time they were the definition of a boy band. The definition that you use didn't come about until later. If you were to apply your definition of boy band to the era that the Beatles were popular then you'd be applying that label to The Temptations and other Motown groups as they didn't (typically) write their own songs or play instruments.

Those early Beatle records aren't much more than crap put out by boy bands. If they stopped recording after Hard Day's Night or Beatles For Sale do you really think that the Beatles would be any more remembered than other pop dreck? It's Revolver and on that the Beatles made their name. Hell, they had 18 covers on their first 4 albums (Hard Day's Night being the only one of full Lennon/McCartney tunes.)

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:33 am

Jerloma wrote:I don't know where you guys ever got the idea that Rock and Roll had to be so fucking erudite. It doesn't. Sometimes it just has to be fun. Make people move and smile. Comparing Kiss to Menudo is clinically insane. Put your snobby biases aside, listen to something like Detroit Rock City and tell me that's not Rock and Roll.

Ugh.

I feel uptight on a Saturday night

Good thing they didn't notice that "tonight" rhymes with "alright" or they would have used that painfully childish beginner's building block, too.

Get up
Everybody's gonna move their feet
Get down
Everybody's gonna leave their seat

That doesn't demand deconstruction; it is so obviously and "clinically" stupid a child could see it. Or should. It's insultingly dumb. That's my biggest problem with KISS. I can write off the silliness of the on-stage third rate mime act. But the song lyrics are unforgivable.

Comparing KISS to Menudo makes a lot of sense. If you think about it. Interchangeable pieces, toxically vapid idiocy, idols rather than musicians. Where KISS failed is in not franchising themselves. They didn't even do that right. One of the reasons Blue Man Group was created was because nobody can identify any one of the Blue Men, hence they can have concurrent shows running all over the world. Same show, different actors. KISS could have easily done the same thing. Nobody would have noticed. Bare minimum of musicianship required, crank up the reverb to veil the singing of those moron lyrics, let the pyrotechnicians do all the work. Rake in the clown cash.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:44 am

I think you're missing the point. They're not trying to say anything. They're just trying to entertain people and they were lucky enough to do that enough to make a lot of money along the way. You're not wrong about the vapidness of their lyrics but not everyone turns to music to be intellectually inspired.

howard · Post by **howard** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:52 am

I can't say you are wrong calling the Beatles a boy band, and I am not saying so. Just my opinion. No fight here, just talking. There is plenty of bleed-over regardless of what definitions we apply.

I think I consider target audience as the key criteria, i suppose. And I 'credit' the Jackson 5 as the inventors, as those who copied the Beatles, from Dave Clark onward, were very different than those who copied the Jackson 5, in this and many other regards.

Shit, the Jackson 5 played their own instruments and wrote songs, until Berry Gordy took over.

The Temptations/Four Tops and their ilk, very different animal. A developmental step from Doo Wop towards 60s poppy-R+B. Even tougher to define and draw dividing lines than dissecting the 'boy band' thing.

Oh, and J-lo, I have a big tent when it comes to what is Rock and Roll and what is not. (Unlike my opinion on what is metal.) Sure Detroit Rock City is R+R. I Think I Love You from the Partridge Family is R+R.

But these are bad R+R. The only thing that I've ever heard from KISS that rises above bad R+R is I Wanna R+R All Night. Barely. By a grey cunt hair. On a good day when I am feeling charitable.

Any institution that calls itself a Hall of Fame that includes such stuff is a joke. Yeah, it's rock and roll. Sure, the Hall of Popular Music or the Hall of Bands that sold more than X million albums. And, yes I understand the definition of the word 'fame'. I also understand the usage of the term Hall of Fame by other institutions. Michael Jordan played baseball, was real popular, sold lots of tickets. Perhaps the most popular minor league player ever. His inclusion in any baseball-related HOF, much less the one in Cooperstown, would be as silly as KISS in the R+RHOF. And this inclusion of KISS speaks to the nature of the R+RHOF much more than it speaks to the nature of KISS.

The Sex Pistols, and many others, got it right.

(GP teases me because, when pressed, I pick this as my favorite song from his deep catalog. It is far down on his list. Fuck you, GP, you wrote the damn thing.)

Oh, when you hear Aretha
Singing on some car advertisement
Or with a big fussy band
On some Rock and Roll Museum concert
Well, she still has the lungs, and the dress and the stole
You might even say that she still's got soul
But not that much

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:03 pm

Well in sports you have stats and shit to measure someone's performance. Music is so damn subjective that you pretty much have to go by popularity.

It should also be noted that Paul Stanley is an incredible vocalist.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:14 pm

Jerloma wrote:I think you're missing the point. They're not trying to say anything. They're just trying to entertain people and they were lucky enough to do that enough to make a lot of money along the way. You're not wrong about the vapidness of their lyrics but not everyone turns to music to be intellectually inspired.

I think you're missing the point. This is a conversation about what merits induction into the R&RHOF.

And how do you know they weren't trying to write masterpieces of lyrical poetry and that dumbass rubbish they recorded was sadly the best they could manage? You're too forgiving in making the assumption that they are smart guys aiming at a low brow audience, deliberately selling crap to morons. You may wish to consider that water rises to its own level and that KISS has a low brow following because they are very much a low brow band. Forgiving stupidity as "intentional" is not an unusual error, mind you, particularly when one believes a visible act of stupidity is surely un-natural; human instinct forces the belief that, no, nobody is really that dumb. Yet, you visit Facebook every day. If what you see there doesn't remove all doubt, nothing will.

That's the beauty of This Is Spinal Tap; it removes all doubt. Gone is the argument that these are intelligent people profiting from a moron trailer park demographic. The Spinal Tap songs are so dreadfully stupid because the schmucks that created it are so dreadfully stupid (yet they delusionally carry on as if they are friggin' brilliant). That's KISS. This Is Spinal Tap even draws KISS into their picture as well when Jeanine, the idiot girlfriend of David St. Hubbins, as the new manager wants to give the band a make-over based on astrology, yoga and heroic mythology. But even by Spinal Tap's standards, this is far too unacceptably dumb for the band. Yet Jeanine's image for the band is pretty much exactly what KISS is.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:28 pm

Jerloma wrote:It should also be noted that Paul Stanley is an incredible vocalist.

Now that's just laughable. If this was football game, at this point there would be a team doctor standing over you, reviving you, asking you if you know your name or what city you're in, broken ammonia vials scattered around.

Giff · Post by **Giff** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:40 pm

Scottie wrote:
Jerloma wrote:I think you're missing the point. They're not trying to say anything. They're just trying to entertain people and they were lucky enough to do that enough to make a lot of money along the way. You're not wrong about the vapidness of their lyrics but not everyone turns to music to be intellectually inspired.
I think you're missing the point. This is a conversation about what merits induction into the R&RHOF.

Isn't Abba in the R&RHOF? They've defined the metrics and by those, it's hard to argue that KISS doesn't belong.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:49 pm

Scottie wrote:
Jerloma wrote:It should also be noted that Paul Stanley is an incredible vocalist.
Now that's just laughable. If this was football game, at this point there would be a team doctor standing over you, reviving you, asking you if you know your name or what city you're in, broken ammonia vials scattered around.

He really does. Dude even played the Phantom of the Opera on Broadway.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:03 pm

Giff wrote:Isn't Abba in the R&RHOF? They've defined the metrics and by those, it's hard to argue that KISS doesn't belong.

Yeah, sigh, ABBA is in there, too. But ABBA didn't redefine the metrics, those who elected them did. ABBA is neither rock nor roll. They are a disco disco-ballad plastic product. They weren't even the best musical act from that country at the time (the Swedish Chef was). They were probably surprised to be inducted and likely would not have thought of being inducted themselves.

Celine Dion has sold about a quarter-billion albums. Based on the ABBA metric, she'll be in there too someday. Really. McDonna was inducted a few years back as well. McDonna just dances to electronic beats made by non-musicians.

There'd be no argument if they simply renamed the building properly. Remove "Rock'n'Roll" and "Hall of Fame" and replace it with "The Museum Of Popular Music". That would be an accurate description. Although then we wouldn't have any fun bandying about what merits.

Joni Mitchell is in there, too. And that's silly. So is John Lennon. And that's silly. So is Brian Epstein. Silly.

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:10 pm

I can see both sides of this. Like, I have to consider Huey Lewis and the News to be "Rock and Roll"? I know it's a subjective term but...Huey fucking Lewis and the cocksucking News? They are like Jimmy Buffet with an electric guitar and a keyboard.

On the other hand, music is the product of tastes to a much higher degree than, say, who is the best running back. I think most of the music you guys listen to is hot buttered garbage and it's the same way vice versa. And the Rock and Roll HoF is so irrelevant that I guess all popular acts should probably be mentioned in it.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:20 pm

I agree with Sean, completely.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:20 pm

Jerloma wrote:He really does. Dude even played the Phantom of the Opera on Broadway.

So fucking what. He could buy his own production of that crap, too, if he wants. You think Broadway doesn't have autotune? Donnie Osmond is a "star" on Broadway, too. Names get hired to sell tickets all the time. Was Peter Criss in Cats? Was Ace Frehley in Starlight Express? Who cares. Do you think Robert DeNiro really speaks a variety of Sicilian dialects or perhaps there is an Oscar for Best Sound Editing for a reason?

What do you call a guy that finished last in his class at medical school?

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:24 pm

Scottie wrote:
What do you call a guy that finished last in his class at medical school?

A anesthesiologist?

howard · Post by **howard** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:58 pm

Rush2112 wrote:
Scottie wrote:
What do you call a guy that finished last in his class at medical school?
A anesthesiologist?

Hey Rush, Knock Knock:

Fuck right off, that's who's there!

(Let's go. Smokes.)

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Wed Dec 18, 2013 4:17 pm

Fuck off Trevor.