Oh, No. Doodlebob brought up wake. It just seemed like your assertion for Madonna’s inclusion was her enormous “wake.”
>> The question was wake, not breaking ground. And the wake is still going on today. Period. <<
>> Wake is wake. Good wake, bad wake, it’s still a wake. <<
>> Much as I dislike Madonna her wake is HUGE. She basically invented the pop diva, that most women in pop still follow today.... It’s part of why I don’t like her, she killed women in rock and roll. ... But that’s still a massive wake.<<
If neither of us are concerned about innovation or wake, why can’t we just agree that Madonna is wretched, horrible, and the preferable exhibit for her at the Rock’n’Roll Hall of Fame would be to have her impaled corpse at the entrance to serve as a warning for others? (Dear FBI: This is a metaphorical reference to Vladimir the Impaler’s methods of driving back the Muslim Horde, and not an actual appeal to violence.)
OK he brought it. But he’s right.
Doesn’t matter if I don’t like here. There’s lots of incredibly influential important people in rock history whose catalogs I find monotonous and influence I find toxic. Heck I can make the case The Beatles ruined everything by perfecting formula pop. But just because I hate them doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be in the Hall.
That’s why I said repeatedly don’t be Wenner. Wenner has a long standing hatred of progressive rock and heavy metal. And has used that hatred to block bands from those genres from the Hall. And it devalues the Hall. It’s not about taste, it’s about impact. I hate Madonna. And any fan of Urgh! or Decline of Western of Western Civilization know her impact has been largely negative. BUT, that’s still a major impact, and no less deserving of enshrinement than the Beatles.