The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame recently announced its newest batch of inductees. Among the newly recognized hall-of-famers are Hall and Oates, KISS, Nirvana, Cat Stevens, the E Street band, Linda Ronstadt, Andrew Loog Oldham, Brian Epstein and Peter Gabriel. As time goes on and modern musical genres take pop and rock in new directions, questions begin to crop up as to the ongoing relevance of the Hall of Fame. For instance, what should their criteria be and how will they deal with the increasing influence of genres outside of rock?  Grant and Jacob discuss possible future courses of action for the Hall of Fame:

Grant’s Take: Rock and Roll Hall of Fame should include important contributors to the creation of rock’s offshoot genres

The rock era of American popular music is in fact a somewhat specific period of time from the 1950 to, some may consider, just about now. Electronic dance music (EDM) is becoming the dominant force in music, and the classic rock and roll sound of the 20th century waning in popularity. But what better way to remember this wonderful era of musical innovation than with a hall of fame displaying the most important and influential artists of the time? Because the rock era involved the creation and development of several other genres, it should be an important criteria to being inducted to have made at least a minor, if not significant, contribution to the creation and development of a genre. This will make the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame better in two ways: it will make the institution more exclusive, with a smaller group of artists receiving the honor. In fact, the number of inductees varies from year to year, with some years having around fifteen inductees and others having around five. In my opinion, only a few inductees per year would yield a better Hall of Fame, as it would showcase bigger names with more followers who have actually made important contributions. The other way this criteria would improve the Hall of Fame would be the increased diversity in genres it would encompass. It is a mistake to think that the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is, or should be, simply our favorite rock bands from years past. Many artists inducted in years past hail from a variety of genres, but in all honesty, more important artists from these non-rock genres should be included. It’s time we see someone like Mary J. Blige, a pioneer of the hip-hop soul genre, before yet another rock band.

Jacob’s Take: Rock and Roll Hall of fame should honor those who have contributed to rock specifically, other genres should seek recognition elsewhere, possibly in an entirely new hall of fame.

The Rock and Roll Hall of fame serves as an important showcase for the genre from which it takes its name: rock and roll. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame should either rethink its name, or include strictly musicians who have contributed, in some way, to rock and roll. If we want to honor important R&B artists, or modern rappers not associated with the initial conception of their genre and its subsequent deviation from other genres, we should not do so in an institution that was created with the express intention of acknowledging important rock musicians.

If, for instance, we created a separate hall of fame for early jazz musicians not involved in rock, it would be fine to recognize Charlie Parker, Max Roach, Thelonious Monk or Charles Mingus. But to recognize them next to Nirvana and KISS would not only make for an unsettling contrast, it would likely be considered blasphemous by people heavily entrenched in rock and jazz alike. It is for this reason we should house different genres separately. It follows simple logic that the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame limit its scope to rock artists alone.