Grex Music2 Conference

Item 37: Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (Rebels behind glass)

Entered by orinoco on Sun Apr 6 01:24:48 1997:

The past few days I was in Cleveland OH with my family, and one of the things
we saw there was the Rock and Roll hall of fame.  It's a decent
place--the sort of thing you go to once and it's interesting, but then you've
seen it all.  There were some cute computer exhibits that gave you five-second
blurbs about famous musicians, or showed you the less-famous influences of
famous musicians; also displays about different genres in rock music, about
album-cover art, and of collections of stuff--clothing, drumsticks, etc. 
Overall, the best part was the movies they had about rock music and culture.
While much of the time they said a lot without managing to *say*
anything--listening to a guitarist talk is a lot like listening to an actor
play the guitar--the movies had two things going for them.  First, they did
have occasional coherent moments that are well worth seeing, such as Pete
Townsend <sp?> of the Who talking about the casualties of the 'Live fast, die
young' philosophy.  And second, they actually showed more than '60's
user-friendly rock.  
This is more than I can say for most of the rest of the exhibits--they know
their audience, and they give them what they want.  While they did pay lip
service to the usual suspects-- punk, for Revitalizing Popular Music, rap for
being the Voice Of The Oppressed, and Kurt Cobain for Representing Generation
X--they never went past talk.  Except for brief clips in the videos, I heard
no music that I couldn't find on an 'oldies' station, saw no posters in the
gift shop for bands later than Led Zepplin, and in general didn't encounter
anything my grandparents woudn't find innocuous.  This is not a complaint
against old people in general--this is a complaint against my grandparents'
taste.
In a way, that's what I should have expected.  Recent music has been so
cynical and rebellious that it would be difficult to put on a pedestal and
honor.  Even most '60's rock musicians would have found the idea of a hall
of fame 'too establishment'.  But the work of rebellious artists is hung in
galleries and sold for millions of dollars, the work of rebellious poets is
anthologized and praised by 'the establishment', and classical music that once
would have seemed shockingly modern is now viewed as completely innocuous.
If we can put Van Gogh and Beethoven on pedestals, why not Trent Reznor?
All right, maybe that's a bit much to ask, but at least some Hendrix? 
Pleeease?...
5 responses total.

#1 of 5 by orinoco on Sun Apr 6 01:26:05 1997:

Now that I've gone and entered this, I realize it might have been more
appropriate in the Travel .cf.  Oh well...


#2 of 5 by krj on Sun Apr 6 04:45:40 1997:

Send the fw of the Travel cf, whoever that is, a request for a link!


#3 of 5 by senna on Mon Apr 7 05:00:31 1997:

What?  no Jimmy Hendrix?  That's practically sacrilege! :)  Wait 20 
years, when bands like Nirvana and Pearl Jam are elgible for induction, 
and we might finally see something about them.  They definitely defined 
music in the 90's.


#4 of 5 by ganz on Mon Apr 7 09:04:58 1997:

Hi I am Ganesh.Very much interested in music.Planning to form my own ROCK Band
called "THE HAWKS".Do get in touch with me at ganz@cyberspace.org
Waiting for ur reply
Ganesh.


#5 of 5 by orinoco on Tue Apr 8 22:14:10 1997:

That's Jimi, senna, speaking of sacrelige....and he was mentioned, video clips
of him were used, etc.  I just never heard any hendrix *played*.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: