Linda Ronstadt

Rock & Roll Hall of Famer

Category: Performer

Inducted in: 2014

Inducted by: Glenn Frey

Nominated in: 2014

First Eligible: 1995 Ceremony


Inducted into Rock Hall Projected in 2022 (ranked #300) .


Essential Albums (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3Amazon CD
Heart Like a Wheel (1974)

Essential Songs (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3YouTube
You're No Good (1974)
When Will I Be Loved (1974)
Blue Bayou (1977)
It's So Easy (1977)

Linda Ronstadt @ Wikipedia

Linda Ronstadt Videos

Comments

419 comments so far (post your own)

WELL THE FACT THAT THE FIRST HUGE FEMALE ROCK SUPERSTAR IS NOT IN THE HALL OF FAME IS BEYOND BELIEF; CONSIDERING HER SUBSTANTIAL SUCCESS IN ROCK, POP AND MANY OTHER GENRES. SHE HAS BEEN A MAJOR INFLUENCE ON MANY OF TODAY'S ARTISTS AND HELPED PAVE THE WAY FOR THEM!!!!!!

Posted by eddiejinnj on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 14:03pm


Can anyone name another SOLO female performer that first charted in the 1960's (besides Janis Joplin) and topped the charts with Rock 'n Roll songs? Crowned the Queen of Rock and the Queen of Country Rock by multiple music critics and fans alike Linda Ronstadt has had an unparalled influence on the music industry as a whole and she should have been the first female inducted, NOT THE LAST!

Posted by Rob on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 14:31pm


Linda Ronstadt was the first solo female rock superstar (Joplin only had one solo album and Grace Slick was part of Airplane). She sold millions of albums, sold out arenas, was, and still is, hugely influential, was largely responsible for not only discovering and/or promoting other artists by recording their songs (Warren Zevon, The Eagles), but rescued classic rock songs (You're No Good, Back in the USA, That'll Be the Day, etc.) from obscurity and exposed them to a new generation in a time when "classic rock" stations did not exist. Her non-induction is suspicious because of its long, long absence.

Posted by richard on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 16:38pm


I should have said that her non-induction is suspicious because of her induction's long, long absence.

I would further add that it's a curious fact that all of Ronstadt's peers--James Taylor, Jonie Mitchell, Bonnie Raitt, The Eagles, Jackson Browne--have all been inducted, so why not Linda? And don't give me that "it's because she didn't write her own songs" line because, even though she did write a few of her own songs, Dusty Springfield didn't write her own songs, either and she's (most deservedly) been inducted.

Posted by richard on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 16:45pm


The hall of fame is not complete without Linda.... to have artists (i.e. Brenda Lee, as worthy as she is ) without a fraction of Linda's quality or output and omit Linda is inexcusable!

Posted by Robert A. on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 17:22pm


Why is one of the best voices ever not in the rock and roll hall of fame.Did she piss off a few music critics? She did a lot of great albums, alot of touring from 1973 thru 1983 I can't think of any female artist could come close to her talent or output.The wrong people must be voting because it is a damn shame she has not included there.

Posted by brian on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 18:20pm


I won't speak to her overall career because I'm unfamiliar with most of it, but her cover of the Rolling Stones' Tumbling Dice is pretty horrible.

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 18:26pm


The first female rock superstar and her multiplatinum sales would make her a lock on those merits alone. Her incredible influence on the Country-Rock movement (The Byrds and The Flying Burrito Brothers were her male counterparts in the movement) as well as opening doors for other women in rock are unsurpassed. After 40 years she is still making World Class music with her Grammy nominated Adieu False Heart (and new standard of Walk Away Renee). Her induction is already 12 years overdue.

Posted by kgreen on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 19:30pm


Just on the basis of the albums she released between 1973 and 1982 alone, Linda would have long since merited a place in there. But she has also influenced no fewer than three generations of female singers, who will attest to her influence. The people on the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame ought to get over whatever animosity they have, look at the music history she created, and induct this lady.

Posted by Erik on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 20:17pm


Linda was the biggest selling female artist for many years, her huge body of work shows that she was and is truly the finest female singer ever, I am amazed she is not in the hall of fame. Who decides? Do they know anything? Linda is one of the most influential women in any music category but more so in Rock and Roll.

Posted by don on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 20:48pm


I'm angry at myself that I even CARE about the R&R Hall of Fame.

How can anyone take it seriously? Come on! Look at some of the inductees!!!!

Now that I think about it, I'm glad Linda Ronstadt is not a part of this group.

Maybe the R&R Fame powers that be know that they are not wortyhy of HER!

pat

Posted by patdevitto on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 23:23pm


Not sure what universe you are living in Kit but even the notorious anti-Linda critic Robert Christgau stated in his book of 1970 albums that Linda's live version of 'Tumblin' Dice' 'stomped all over the Rolling Stones' version. It can't be all that horrible if one of the most anti-Ronstadt critics actually disagreed with your evaluation. I wouldn't be surprised if Christgau is one of the "deciders" at the Hall.

Let's face it, had Linda died after Heart Like A Wheel she would already be in the Hall of Fame. If that is what it takes then I am glad she's avoided the honor and continues to inspire and turn out "classic" music even today in 2007.

Posted by robtempe on Tuesday, 01.30.07 @ 17:04pm


Christgau is certainly free to think what he wants, but all I can focus on is how badly she has mangled the lyrics.

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 01.30.07 @ 18:44pm


I remember when her rendition came out she was asked about it. Her band used to do the song at the sound check. Jagger was in one of the cities, LA I think, and heard Linda sing it at a concert. He complimented her and said she should sing more rock songs because she was good at those. She in turn told him he should sing more ballads because she thiught he was a good ballad singer. She asked Jagger about the lyrics because she was not sure what they were. He responded by hand writing the lyrics out for her. I remember seeing a picture of her singing with Stones in concert. Everbody complains about her botching the words,but she sang what Jagger wrote down. If they are wrong blame Mick.

Posted by underdog on Wednesday, 01.31.07 @ 20:48pm


Ignore that she is, as one persone said, "the first female rock superstar (which is debatable). The fact that she had more number one hits than Elvis Presley, CCR and Journey COMBINED should establish her credentials for the Hall.

Posted by Joe on Tuesday, 03.13.07 @ 17:32pm


Linda is an angel. Why she has not been inducted is indeed a mystery. I think the voting members are jealous of her versatility and variety. And at 60, she has the same pipes as she did 30 years ago. Linda may have her political views, but like the Dixie Chicks, she should be honored passionately sooner rather than later.

Posted by BT on Wednesday, 03.14.07 @ 05:29am


"I won't speak to her overall career because I'm unfamiliar with most of it, but her cover of the Rolling Stones' Tumbling Dice is pretty horrible."

That is a joke - he admits he knows nothing of her career, then speaks of some ioslated incident of her "mangling" lyrics. Stick to what you know and do not use some obscure incident or song to denegrate an entire prolific career.

Idiot

Posted by A Fan on Thursday, 03.22.07 @ 18:13pm


"I won't speak to her overall career because I'm unfamiliar with most of it, but her cover of the Rolling Stones' Tumbling Dice is pretty horrible."
I enjoyed her cover of this song, and the whole album " Living the USA" from which it is from. Listen and read, this lady artistic, tough, intelligent and a trailblazer. She made to cool to accept females in man's world (big state - big money - big pressures) without having to be part of a group, i.e, Heart, Nicks, Slick. Unfortunately, Janis Joplin died young and early she never saw her career sprout. Linda has had the lows and highs. She is truly and artist and is truy and female rock artist because there is no definition its just somebody with integrity and Linda has shown this throughout her career. I'm glad she did not die after "Heart Like a Wheel" Since then, she has shown courage growth and has taken her fans on a musical journey. This woman is music. This woman should be inducted into the hall of fame soon.

Posted by Sharekentile on Tuesday, 04.10.07 @ 17:00pm


Put aside all of the obviouos qualifications. Biggest selling 70s female artist, 3 or 4 number 1 albums. first multi-platiumn artist, 1st female rock superstar yada yada yada.

Induct Linda for her Background vocals alone:

Listen to two of the biggest rock and roll hits which were not hers. Neil Young's Harvest Moon and The Eagles Take It Easy. Lind'a background vocals are a vital part of each of these cuts and in my opinion, her contributions arguably make or break their hit potential. How many times have you sung along to the line "It's a girl my Lord in a flatbed Ford slowing down to take a look at me". Now go back and listen to hear whose voice makes that line soar.

Posted by Mike on Monday, 07.23.07 @ 12:48pm


Linda not inducted is idiotic. The west coast isn't that well represented ever - it's such an east coast based mentality. Look who is inducted (Bonnie Raitt? Sorry, sold a 1/3 of Linda... and an iota of the chart hits). My guess is Linda is out because of her outspokeness... the R&RHOF is a corporate machine designed to make a profitable TV show. The R&R HOF is the establishment, NOT the counter culture.

Posted by Davis on Thursday, 07.26.07 @ 08:46am


I'm pretty sure there aren't any kids out there who have recently discovered Linda Ronstadt and say, "Man, this is amazing! I have to have all of her albums!"

Some artists are huge at the time, but just don't have that long term impact. It's not because she was bad or did something wrong, it's just that it is incredibly difficult and rare to be meaningful 25 years later.

Posted by c.w. on Thursday, 07.26.07 @ 09:26am


Davis, are you serious? Most of the music industry (and entertainment industry) is liberal. They would not hesitate to induct someone who was outspoken from the left. So, to blame her lack of induction on her "outspokeness", that her politics are just too radical for the "corporate" hacks at the RRHOF...that's crap. There are other artists who are (or have been) just as outspoken on their political and cultural beliefs who are in the RRHOF. That ain't the reason.

Also, the west coast is not represented? Are you kidding me? Santana, CCR, Jefferson Airplane, Eagles, Grateful Dead, Doors, Byrds, Buffalo Springfield, CSN, Janis, Fleetwood Mac (at least some of the members), Mamas and Papas...those are some of the California-originated bands inducted in the RRHOF that come to mind. I'm sure there are more.

Perhaps she's not in the Hall of Fame because she kinda sucks.

Posted by Dezmond on Thursday, 07.26.07 @ 10:33am


"Counter-culture" is just a nicer-sounding term for "dumb reactionaries with middle school political views."

Posted by William on Thursday, 07.26.07 @ 10:59am


Why isn't this woman in?. A trailblazer and pioneer in terms of doing things on her own terms in the field of rock. In an industry where WOMEN were gobbled up and thrown to the wolves this woman survived on her own terms and opened the door for many people. She achieved a lot of first and she was not just a studio musician but a successful concert artist -selling out huge stadiums as a SOLO ARTIST. Not to mention that she's maintained her integrity and is putting out great music, still. To say "her music sucks" is very weak argument and off point. Everyone has their favorites. But for the mere fact of her actions, pioneering, consistentcy, durability and strength, coupled with her popularitym she IS what rock n roll WAS all about. i don't know what happened.

Posted by JohnnyB on Thursday, 07.26.07 @ 13:07pm


"..she's maintained her integrity.."

What the fuck does that mean?
I have no beef with Ronstadt per se, but this statement is just odd.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 07.26.07 @ 13:52pm


Linda deserves to be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, period.

Posted by Joel on Sunday, 08.5.07 @ 15:58pm


OK, Joel. Very thoughtful argument. You've convinced me, I've changed my mind.

Posted by Dezmond on Monday, 08.6.07 @ 12:40pm


Oh, and saying that she "sucks" is real "thoughtful" too....

Posted by Anon on Monday, 08.6.07 @ 14:49pm


Wikipedia:

"Ronstadt, who has reportedly sold in excess of 87 million records worldwide opened many doors for women in rock by being out in front. Ronstadt is one of the top female vocalists in U.S. history and part of the list of best-selling music artists."

Wow....influential to female artists and sold a gazillion records - sounds like hall of fame material to me...even if she "sucks."

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 08.6.07 @ 19:13pm


Anyone can Wiki. Anyone can Wiki. I've got nothing against Rondstadt, but that excerpt certainly overstates her influence.

Posted by Casper on Monday, 08.6.07 @ 19:32pm


The article in question appears to be extensively cross-referenced. Wiki certainly isn't 100% trustworthy, but it tends to get the short shrift more than it deserves.

Posted by William on Monday, 08.6.07 @ 22:29pm


"Oh, and saying that she "sucks" is real "thoughtful" too...."

You seem to have a real problem with context. Saying she sucked was a humorous topper to a detailed counter-arguement debunking several arguements pro-Ronstadt.To focus in on that one statement as though it is some kind of weakness is consistent with the actions that a stupid person would take.

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 02:02am


Actually, there was really nothing in his post indicating why she should not be in. It was about politics and how there are plenty of West coast bands already in the hall. In fact, his argument against her induction was ONLY that she "sucks." Of course, that is his opinion, but other than that, there was nothing else there...

boy Kit you really don't get it. I am stupid? Kit, since you love to throw that term around, why not reveal who you really are. What is your level of education? Do you have a job? Are you a counterboy too (like William) and use this site as a way to "show off" and compensate for your little life. Somehow, I doubt you will respond or wil lie. Be very careful, when calling someone as smart as me, stupid. Now, don't you have some talentless punk to listen to...you know the kind of music you elevate in your mind, when it is really nothing more than two chord noise.

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 05:59am


Don't you all know that Anon is a well known published author? He's smart! Haven't you picked up a copy of his latest works, "The 7 Habits of Highly Annoying People", or "Alienating Others for Fun and Profit", or his best seller, "How to Argue Like a Second Grader (it's Them-- Not You!)"?

Posted by shawn on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 08:49am


"Are you a counterboy too (like William)"-Anon

You've never actually told anyone what you do for a living, so you've got a pretty good blank slate for making something up.

But for the record, I'm a full-time student, and I work two jobs, boy. I'll expect some sort of dull reply to this as well, precisely what depending on your own level of (mis)education, but stop trying to pretend like something as simple as TYPING takes up some huge chunk of time. If you're even half as smart as you pretend, you're smarter than your BS.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 09:26am


"Actually, there was really nothing in his post indicating why she should not be in"

Is this an act, or are you really just illiterate?

ps: full-time student working two jobs this summer, including doing some technical work for my school district. Which doesn't have anything to do with knowing what you're talking about, which you don't.

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 19:16pm


Kit / Shawn: Dez said that LR sucks. What was his reason for saying that she sucks? The fact is, you cannot answer that b/c he never elaborated a reason. Not saying that it is a bad thing or a good thing, but he gave no rationale whatsover as to why he thinks she sucks. His comments pertained to a post just above his about liberal politics and some west coast thing. I agreed with that, but he never put in any elaboration as to why he thinks she sucks.

Now, if Dez wanted to chime in now, after the fact, and provide a rationale, then that is fine. But, he did not do it above. If you cannot see that, then mb you are the stupid one.

BTW, I am forensic psychologist...

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 19:48pm


"BTW, I am forensic psychologist..." - Anon

The hell you are.
If you really were, god help the poor souls whose fates would rely on your perception and judgment. Geezus Krist.

Posted by shawn on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 22:13pm


"Dez said that LR sucks. What was his reason for saying that she sucks?" - Anon


"Saying she sucked was a humorous topper to a detailed counter-arguement debunking several arguments pro-Ronstadt." - Kit

Read it again and try, try, TRY to comprehend, you fucking wedge of Styrofoam.

Posted by shawn on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 22:20pm


This has to be a gimmick. No one is this dumb.

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 22:46pm


"BTW, I am forensic psychologist..."

Which obviously makes you more qualified to talk about music.

ps: I thought you said you were a math major in college. Exactly how does that help you in the exciting and stimulating field of forensic psychology?

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 08.7.07 @ 22:48pm


Still have not heard why Dez said LR sucks and what he did not like about her? Who is dumb?

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 01:44am


"They would not hesitate to induct someone who was outspoken from the left"

Okay, so he refutes the guys point that she is not in because she is liberal - yeah

"Also, the west coast is not represented? Are you kidding me?"

Okay, he refutes the point that she is not in b/c she is from the west coast - okay. So, Dez makes nice points to refute the moronic comments.

Then he states in the affirmative that she is NOT in the hall because she "sucks" - I just wanted to know WHY he thinks she sucks since he did not say. So, since you keep referring me back to his post, am I to assume that he thinks she SUCKS because she IS from the West coast and because she IS liberal in her views. Obviously, no.

Now, who is dumb? I guess you have a reading comprehension problem...

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 01:51am


Another extensively cross referenced WIKI quote:

According to Amazon.com, Linda Ronstadt became the American female rock superstar of the Me Decade. Dirty Linen magazine describes her as the "first true woman rock 'n' roll superstar.....(selling) out stadiums with a string of mega-successful albums.".As author Gerri Hirshey explains in her book We Gotta Get Out of This Place: The True, Tough Story of Women in Rock, Linda Ronstadt was the first "arena-class rock diva", with "hugely anticipated tours.". Likewise, her album covers. posters, magazine covers - basically her entire image conveyed - was just as famous as her music.. That by the end of the decade, Redbook described her as, "the most successful female rock star in the world..(who) has survived in the mostly male world of rock". and Cashbox crowned Linda Ronstadt Top Female Artist of the Decade."

In an industry, AT THE TIME, where pretty girls like her with either thrown to the wolves, put in a band and/or became groupies, this chick survived it all and was out in front/solo. Shiiat and all. That's tough.....

Posted by CallNOW on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 03:55am


Wow, I didn't think one tossed off comment at the end of a post would inspire so much discussion. Kit is correct, it was an attempt at humor at the end of the substance of my post, which was addressing the silly conspiracy theories as to why Ronstadt has not been inducted.

But Anonymous is right, I did not give substantive reason for why I said she "sucks", and honestly I do not have one. I have limited exposure to her music, therefore I retract my statement that she sucks. She probably does suck, my gut tells me that she probably sucks, but I cannot definitely say that she does. I was guilty of the same thing I was making fun of that other dude for, which is making a blanket definitive statement without backing it up with good argument.

Since we are in the mood for confessions and sharing, I am an attorney who wishes he was a musician. So, I do the next best thing, listen to a lot of music, read about music, and get together with some friends and jam and try and write songs from time to time.

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 08:31am


Dezmond, I don'y believe you are a lwayer. You're way too passive and agreeable. Ha-ha - I'm kidding. You are the resident Nice Guy though, and I appreciate your consistent civility; you're a more patient man than I!
You're giving Knucklehead too much room to squirm out; no, you didn't present direct evidence against Ronstadt, but that wasn't the point - (though it's the one he'd like to tap dance into).The point was that your comment was just a vague little topper - a cherry - on the sundae you had constructed that was INTENDED only to be a refute of the stupid theories of conspiracy against Ronstadt. There was no call to qualify your aside... at least not by anyone with proprly functioning powers of perception. Anon likes to be obnoxiously contrary, just for the sake of it. He obfuscates for sport - or, my theory is, because he's really can't follow a cogent thought process and he's a misanthrope.

You have nothing to retract, Dez.

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 09:17am


Yes, I do try to be agreeable when possible. Probably why I'm not a very good lawyer. =)

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 11:25am


"Anon likes to be obnoxiously contrary"


Shawn, you read into things way too much...all I was pointing out was that Dez said LR sucked, but did not elaborate a reason why. I understood the rest....and that is all I was saying....

Posted by Anon on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 12:28pm


"But Anonymous is right, I did not give substantive reason for why I said she "sucks"


Now what was that Kit you were saying about ME being stupid and not comprehending what Dez wrote...as you would say...idiot.

Dude, honestly, this is way out control....as the guy says on the FOX network...I will give you the "last word" :-)

Posted by Anon on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 12:35pm


Once again, he never, at any point, had to qualify what he said because it was only ever half-serious.

So yes, you you failed to comprehend when Dez himself explained that it was never intended to be an actual argument, which might make you stupid.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 12:40pm


Even when Dez says I am right, you still are so stubborn...that's a shame. Of course he provided no argument, that was my point...Hello, bing, bong......

And, I already know what you are thinking, but the "last word" was given to Kit, not you Bill...

Posted by Anon on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 13:19pm


You lose at semantics.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 13:41pm


He will never, ever, ever comprehend the Point, William. He actually thinks he's been vindicated by Dezmond's politeness. I'm done whacking his brick skull with the tuning fork; he's got a head full of bad wiring or a tape worm in his brain. It's futile.

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 14:31pm


Rock is dead.

Discuss...

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 14:31pm


Oh Lord, Dezmond.......

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 14:32pm


LONG LIVE ROCK, be it dead or alive.

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 15:42pm


There you go, Kit. That was the correct response.

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 16:16pm


Ok here goes..this is My theory

Linda Ronstadt's influence has more to do with WHY she's not inducted into the self-chosen Rock Cognesceti's Hall of Fame. They - the hall of fame - seem to enjoy making the rules of who is important and influential. C'mon you can't do that. If you're influential you're influential. So who do they choose: Poor black groups who never got their due when they should of; male groups that remind them of themselves, mostly English; females that really had no power when they were popular, or are deceased now. But Ronstadt, she is none of this: Check this quote out..

"Stephen Holden of the New York Times wrote, What's New "isn't the first album by a rock singer to pay tribute to the golden age of the pop, but is the best and most serious attempt to rehabilitate an idea of pop that Beatlemania and the mass marketing of rock LPs for teen-agers undid in the mid-60s. In the decade prior to Beatlemania, most of the great band singers and crooners of the 40s and 50s codified a half-century of American pop standards on dozens of albums many of them now long out-of-print"

As a female rock star, she really re-directed Beatlemania influence on American popular music. This is what the Rock'less decisionmakers at the Rock Hall of Fame have a problem with - Ronstadt's influence to change popular music culture, when she had the power to do so. They hate this. It's almost like they have this ego problem of slavemasters. They want to tell people who is important. But in the end public knows. Ronstadt belongs in every hall of fame, including the Rock Hall of Fame but these people who run it need to get out of their ego den first.

Posted by OrlandoCourt on Wednesday, 08.8.07 @ 19:29pm


I think Linda Ronstadt is not in the HOF because of 2 primary reasons.

1. Out of the 32 people on the Nominating Committee, only FOUR (12.5%) are women:

Suzan Evans Hochberg
Elysa Gardner
Edna Gundersen
Claudia Perry


2. Most (if not all?) of Linda's big songs are remakes. This I think is the main reason. This particular group of high-minded elitist types just isn't going to be impressed by someone just reliving others' past accomplishments. This RRHOF wants to induct those that show INNOVATION, INNOVATION, INNOVATION!

Posted by SG on Friday, 08.10.07 @ 00:23am


Yeah because the Hall certainly doesn't want to induct bold female figures. :rollseyes:

Do The Pretenders, Blondie, Patti Smith and The Ronettes sound familiar?

And then you go on to say that Linda's most notable tracks are remakes. That destroys any arguement you were trying to make for her in the first place. She's a pleasant voice, nothing special, move on everyone and post somewhere else. Making uninformed comments clogs the system, we want discussion - not blind loyalty.

Posted by Casper on Friday, 08.10.07 @ 18:53pm


Linda is one of the most INOVATIVE female singers in the history of music. My goodness look at the excellent work she still putting, quality quality. Just for example, in the past, se helped bring back Traditional Pop music that the Beatles wiped out, back into popular culture - this in fact help rock survive that why you see people like Michael Buble make records albums singing Jazz songs and Beatles songs. There's no separation anymore. She helped bridge the past with the future. and her contributio goes on. RONSTADT IS INOVATIVE, INOVATIVE, INOVATIVE.

Her hits are interpretations of songs just like Ella Fitzgerald. You basically skirt the fact that she's recorded 100's of songs that were not hits, some she wrote and some were new, and this in itself exposed new writers. Let see Patti Smith had no hits but if she had hits that were covers she wouldn't be important.. Also, Blondie, Ronettes, Pretenders - some hits for a short period of time plus these were groups...not solo females out there OUT IN FRONT, being exposed like chicks and groupies.

There's a big difference being a solo female singer in a band having MEN back you up, lots of male ego there... Patti Smith, Ronettes, Blondie (deborah harry was part of blondie not a solo singer with male band members thats why its called blondie), they never rocked boat the way linda did. And she was highly paid when women were not usually given that respect.

The cover artist arguement only work if she was just a studio artist but she toured and toured and toured and became the first female to headline major tours. This his how she made her tens of millions of dollars, not from albums. This was big deal for a female and being the first, the Rock should definitely honor her.

But their a bunch of White guys and some women, that honor women they can control and box, and guys that look and remind them of themeselves. It doesn't take much courage to do this. In fact the Rock Hall Fame, created in the 1980's Reagen halcyon days, is anti rock, its corporate rock, and un-authentic which is the antithesis or what rock is.

Posted by CallNOW on Friday, 08.10.07 @ 22:02pm


Let the record show I am neutral on Linda Ronstadt.

I really didn't care for her when I was younger and now I am no big fan.


I was just giving the perspective of a neutral sarcastic observer.

"She's a pleasant voice, nothing special....." is about exactly the way I feel.

Posted by SG on Friday, 08.10.07 @ 22:39pm


"Let see Patti Smith had no hits but if she had hits that were covers she wouldn't be important.. "

Patti Smith did have one pop hit and one of her best-known songs is a reinterpretation (cover just doesn't suit it) of Gloria. She would still be important for the way she approached songwriting, for the reckless abandon of her live shows, and for being a key part of the CBGB scene. Linda Rondstadt was safe music for safe people, covering songs that everyone's parents loved.

"some hits for a short period of time plus these were groups...not solo females out there OUT IN FRONT, being exposed like chicks and groupies."

Chrissy Hynde and Deborah Harry were both the chief songwriters for their bands. They had control of their groups. That is to say, they were out in front.

"There's a big difference being a solo female singer in a band having MEN back you up, lots of male ego there... "
There's an even bigger difference between having a professional backup band behind you to pick up paychecks and being a creative equal, working with your peers towards the same goal, as Hynde did with The Pretenders, as Harry did with Blondie, as Smith did with her friends and collaborators.

I really don't see what your argument is, and how Ronstadt made a bigger stride than any of the women I've mentioned.

Posted by Kit on Saturday, 08.11.07 @ 03:03am


Ronstadt is such a special artist and very unique American talent. We take everything for granted right now in this era and culture, as thought it just popped up. We want it easy. Ronstadt's success never came easy for her but she sure is durable. People take Ronstadt for granted without appreciating all that she's achieved. Calling her accomplishments "no bigger stride" than other people is foolish and typical of the culture of hubris we find ourselves in.

All I know is that when Ronstadt was first truly extremely popular female rock singer, not just in the studio, not just 2 hit albums but consistency and filling up arena rock stadiums to the sound of Waddy Wacthel and Bernie Leadon on guitar as she was out in front and getting her ass chewed by the critics, while other girls singers were hiding in the shadows. She also dared to be pretty and sexy without being labled and chick or groupie. This let to critics thinking she was a puppet and fragile flower.

I consider Ronstadt on par with The Beatles in their signifance to music. A whole generation can define their childhood and adolescene around Linda Ronstadt music. Including influencing, Sheryl Crow (who wrote a great article on Ronstadt for Rolling Stone) KD Lang, Trish Yearwood, The Eagles, Aaron Nevile, Emmylou Harris, Dolly Parton, Maria Muldaur and a whole host of up and coming vocalist. She brought musical genres to the forefront of American Popular Music. She used her massive popularity to progress music. I thinks he informed me that Rock had roots in many other types of music - the music she decided to sing after rock. I for one and immesurable greatful to her for my love of music.

Posted by lovingthehighwayman on Monday, 08.13.07 @ 17:27pm


Linda Ronstadt was definitely NOT the "first truly extremely popular female rock singer" as you called her.

Try Brenda Lee. (over 100 million records sold, a member of the Country Music Hall Of Fame and the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame and had the Beatles as her opening act at one point) Compared to Ronstadt and her elitist background I'll take the story of Brenda Lee who started out with nothing......

Posted by SG on Tuesday, 08.14.07 @ 00:54am


Linda Ronstadt was the first t "arena-class rock diva and e first-ever woman able to command sell-out concerts in arenas and stadiums hosting tens of thousands of fans. That's different from being a studio recording artist. When a woman is competing with a man on his terms , in terms of money which ws generated by concerts and albums, not just going into a studio, recording songs, then performing them on tv but doing major touring to sold out audiences around the world... That's the first true female rock singer that Linda Ronstadt is.
And a lot of the female singer of the past made the record sales numbers via singles not albums - which Linda did, it shows that the costumer really wants to buy the package not just the one hit singer. Linda Ronstadt was the first female singer with consecutive platinum( million selling) albums.
Again the headling of arena rock stadium, the selling of platinum albums, that makes for the first TRUE female rock star. And she lived longer than Janis Jopin.

Posted by GeriDourt on Tuesday, 08.14.07 @ 15:00pm


"Compared to Ronstadt and her elitist background, I'll take the story of Brenda Lee who started out with nothing......"

So, I guess it has to be on or the other? Hmmmm...a litle black and white thinking there. I am sure there is room for both...

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 08.14.07 @ 17:16pm


The Hall is big enough for them both as long as Linda doesn't gain any more weight. I just prefer Brenda Lee which is my right.

As for this "arena rock stadium" filling business I think the folks at the Hall at least have enough savvy to discern that when it comes to evaluating innovation it's not WHERE the music is being played-rather WHAT the music is that's being played.

Posted by SG on Tuesday, 08.14.07 @ 23:51pm


"As long as Linda doesn't gain any more weight" is an ignorant comment that probably shows that quality of fans that Brenda Lee has...

Anway...ARENA ROCK STADIUM days of Ronstadt appear to be over but oh how she was successful, innovative and pioneering...

Now, Linda has gone on to do so many other things, Whereas these blast from the past still play their old hits, What the heck is Brenda Lee singing now, "Rocking around the Christmas Tree"

By the way, you cannot compare Linda Ronstadt with a Brenda Lee, as reasonably ok an artist she was or is, Linda Ronstadt is AN INSTITUTION.

LINDA MUSICAL REINVENTIONA AND INNOVATION IS LEGENDARY...
Linda has gone on to rescue the jazz standards in the 1980's,
She sang appalachian folk music with Emmylou Harris and Dolly Parton
She recorded successful mexican folk music,
She recorded, what many believe is the First Adult Contemporary Album, with Cry like a Rainstorm
And in Recent times she has put out innovative and quality Adult Rock albums, some even with Emmylou Harris and some even Grammy winning and successful
SHE REMAINS CONTEMPORARY AND has put out Grammy winning Folk Rock Roots Records in the recent years.....and continues to challenge herself like a TRUE artist does.

She innovatively challenges her voice and informs the mass audience with her master class of songs.

Anyone here can describe Ronstadt one way and some igorant people can describe her in other ways.

No matter what you say. Linda Ronstadt IS an institution. Up there with the Beatles, Frank Sinatra, Elvis and Aretha Franklin...

Posted by StorminNorman on Wednesday, 08.15.07 @ 10:54am


Not inducting Ronstadt is pure, pseudo-intellectual bull... musicians don't really worry about anything like this induction crap, I think they'll be able to sleep at night if not inducted... the important thing to musicians is how much you communicate...and with over 70 million albums sold worlwide and millions more in singles, and radio airplay, and concerts, and continuing to make music good music - Ronstadt has already done what is important in music, to make what's authentic to her and be fortunate enough to have the ability to have successand getting a mass audience to listen to you. More people have bought a Ronstadt album than have ever watched or know about the Rock Hall of Fame...

The world moves on, you guys should to...

Posted by TurdBlossum on Wednesday, 08.15.07 @ 18:04pm


Norman, what jazz standards were on the brink of extinction only to be saved by Linda in the 80's? Come on. Good jazz would have survived even if Linda had not intervened.

And saying that she recorded the first Adult Contemporary Album is not exactly a complement. That is about as accomplished as recording the first hair metal record or the first disco album. In fact, perhaps that should ban her from induction altogether.

Look, I already said I don't know too much of her music, so I am not saying she shouldn't be inducted. But some of your arguments are not that strong.

And it is not an ignorant thing to say that "as long as Linda doesn't gain any more weight..." if she is, in fact, packing on the pounds these days. I want my female singers hot and skinny, or I don't want them at all.

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 08.15.07 @ 18:48pm


"And saying that she recorded the first Adult Contemporary Album is not exactly a complement"

Why not? There are millions and millions of people that enjoy that style of music. You or I may not like it, but his point was to the innovation issue. And yes, talking about a woman's weight as a reason she should not be in the hall is dumb and sexist. So, I guess they should kick out Aretha?

Btw, it is "compliment"

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 08.15.07 @ 19:27pm


Oh what a convoluted nightmare of misinformation, halt-truths, namecalling, profanity, bickering, mudslinging, bravado and every other bad mannerism known to mankind this thread has become. Where do I begin to untangle it?

In this corner we have "Anonymous" correcting all our misspellings and not understanding a joke when he sees it.

Then we have "orlando court/CALLNOW/lovingthehighwayman/geridourt and any other alias I might have missed person saying, "She also dared to be pretty and sexy without being labled and chick or groupie." Well, if that's one of your selling points for her to be inducted into the Hall Of Fame then I have every right to point out that she's not so pretty and sexy anymore since most people don't associate a heavyset person with being very sexy. So count that as a half joke / half serious comment.

Then,
"What's New isn't the first album by a rock singer to pay tribute to the golden age of the pop, but is the best and most serious attempt to rehabilitate an idea of pop that Beatlemania and the mass marketing of rock LPs for teen-agers undid in the mid-60s" Are you kiddin me????!!!!! Yeah, the kiddies were just rockin' and boppin to all those top 5 singles off of "What's New" on American Bandstand in 1983. NOT 1 OF THOSE TUNES EVEN CRACKED THE TOP 40! So how could any teenager in the land be influenced by it? I don't see Britney, et al beltin out the old ditties in this decade either do you. So much for influencing pop culture. The only people who bought What's New were hard core Ronstadt fans and a few followers of Nelson Riddle.

Next, to say Linda "recorded, what many believe is the First Adult Contemporary Album, with Cry like a Rainstorm" is just not true. AC was started in 1961 and was known as "Easy Listening" so singers like Brenda Lee, Barbara Streisand and Pet Clark would be first in line by a country mile...

That's it for me on this thread. I've already wasted too much time writing more about somebody I don't even care about than I've written about people I DO care about.

Posted by SG on Thursday, 08.16.07 @ 04:24am


Yeah, cuz that's all I do - ass! And, he was not joking either...

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 08.16.07 @ 05:36am


I agree, it is dumb and sexist. But it is not ignorant.

Anonymous, even I find you tedious at times. Adult Contemporary is the very antithesis of "innovative". It is a place where former greatness gets lazy, complacent and goes to die (see Sting's solo career from the 1990's on, Elton John, Eric Clapton) or where there was no greatness to begin with (see Michael Bolton). Some of the most important characteristics of Adult Contemporary music include: it is very safe, non-threatening, and can be played in the dentist's office. So, to call someone a pioneer in Adult Contemporary is not exactly a strong argument for someone's induction into an institution which claims one of its most important criteria is "innovation".

I mean, I guess if you are a leader in any field, you could say that you are innovative within that field, even if it is Adult Contemporary music. But I do not think that is what the founders of the RRHOF have in mind when they say "innovative".

And what is this BS about correcting spelling? That is asinine. What are you, an elementary school teacher?

Posted by Dezmond on Thursday, 08.16.07 @ 09:47am


I see your points. As for the spelling thing, I was busting your chops.

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 08.16.07 @ 10:01am


"And what is this BS about correcting spelling? That is asinine. What are you, an elementary school teacher?" -Dez

No, he's a Forensic Psychologist, remember? Or no wait - he's a Doctor of some kind. But he majored in Math. Whatever he is, he feels self-satisfied enough to continually jeer William for his music store job.
Hey Anon - here's a freebie for ya: I've been a lowly window cleaner for 16 years. There's some cannon food for you; go ahead.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 08.16.07 @ 10:05am


My favorite quote about art and rock

"Extravagant praise is destructive and reverence is rubbish. Great artists are people who find a way to be themselves in their art. Any sort of pretension induces mediocrity in art and life alike"
Margot Fonteyn

And by the was YES, she did help rescue the jazz standards from the elevator and brought them Back to pop culture, you take for granted the jazz standards, although they have survived the artist wouldn't have. in 1982, the ALBUMS WERE OUT OF PRINT. And I don't use Britney Spears as a measuring tool to see wether music is important and has carried on. That's backwards thinking. And Linda sold 5 million copies of Whats's New in the US alone, I doubt that was hard core fans. She turned a whole generation on to music that was the foundation of rock but what the Beatlemania had really uncerimoniously put the back of the bus.

Posted by WritersRule on Thursday, 08.16.07 @ 14:48pm


My favorite quote about art and rock

"Extravagant praise is destructive and reverence is rubbish. Great artists are people who find a way to be themselves in their art. Any sort of pretension induces mediocrity in art and life alike"
Margot Fonteyn

And by the was YES, she did help rescue the jazz standards from the elevator and brought them Back to pop culture, you take for granted the jazz standards, although they have survived the artist wouldn't have. in 1982, the ALBUMS WERE OUT OF PRINT. And I don't use Britney Spears as a measuring tool to see wether music is important and has carried on. That's backwards thinking. And Linda sold 5 million copies of Whats's New in the US alone, I doubt that was hard core fans. She turned a whole generation on to music that was the foundation of rock but what the Beatlemania had really uncerimoniously put the back of the bus.

Posted by WritersRule on Thursday, 08.16.07 @ 14:48pm


I grew to appreciate Rock n Roll and its vast inclusiveness and its historical significance BECAUSE OF Linda Ronstadt. I love her music catalog and her introducing me to the music of Buddy Holly, Elvis Costello, Gershwin, Mercer, Smokey Robinson, Warren Zevon, Emmylou Harris and Ann Savoy. Sorry but the unorthodox and fearless reinvention of Linda Ronstadt has SUBTLELY changed the music industry in so many positive ways. I know this for a fact.

Heck, even MIX MAGAZINE said Ronstadt has influenced many audio professionals too, just in the sheer craft of her production values. She's also a respected record producer, you know?

It doesn't hurt that she was the top selling female artist of the 1970s, helped to bring back back the Standards(elevator music)and the foundation of Rock back into to pop culture, introduced Mariachi to the popular culture, won 11 Grammy awards, nominated for 27 Grammy's, Won an Emmy, was on Broadway, and is still recording Grammy winning and respected folk-rock records. Also, lots of singers look up to her or want to be her.

Do not ever underestimate subtlety. Ronstadt is subtle in her influence but powerful and we see it all the time in our everyday music we hear to this day.

Ronstadt belongs in EVERY music Hall of Fame, except for Polka, I don't think she's recorded in this Genre, but she might reinvent rock n roll oldies in Polka fashion. She did it with children's lullabies.

Posted by DeanHonoroff on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 12:21pm


To anyone who’s still reading or buying Rolling Stone: It’s time to boycott Jann Wenner’s flagship magazine.

I don’t know anyone who buys or reads Rolling Stone, but someone must, since Wenner Media seems to make money. It can’t all be Us Weekly.

Until real rock is served by the Hall of Fame, please don’t buy Rolling Stone or click on any of the ads on its Web site. Then maybe Wenner will get the message that no one can take his Rock and Roll Hall of Fame seriously anymore.

Posted by Britney Spears on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 14:32pm


To anyone who’s still reading or buying Rolling Stone: It’s time to boycott Jann Wenner’s flagship magazine.

I don’t know anyone who buys or reads Rolling Stone, but someone must, since Wenner Media seems to make money. It can’t all be Us Weekly.

Until real rock is served by the Hall of Fame, please don’t buy Rolling Stone or click on any of the ads on its Web site. Then maybe Wenner will get the message that no one can take his Rock and Roll Hall of Fame seriously anymore.

Posted by Britney Spears on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 14:32pm


All spam sucks equally. Delete this copy/pasted crap.

Posted by William on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 14:45pm


I Agree. Boycott Rolling Stone Magazine. Hell, they put Zac Efron on the cover AND they are in charge of the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame. No more taking this seriously. Too many TRUE ARTIST are being overlooked. And they are going to honor Kanye West later this month in a ceremony, with artist singing his songs - most of which are cut and duplicates of other people's songs. heh?

What the heck is going with music in the Country of the good old USA?

Boycott Rolling Stone Magazine.

Posted by NissonFish on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 14:51pm


She's a pleasant voice, nothing special, move on everyone and post somewhere else. Making uninformed comments clogs the system, we want discussion - not blind loyalty.

Posted by Casper on Friday, 08.10.07 @ 18:53pm

I was surprised at the back and forth on this. Why people who are not fans of Ronstadt would be so adamant about her amazes me. Why would you care? I quit reading all of the posts but this one really caught my eye.

First, I am not blindly loyal. I have not cared for every song Linda Ronstadt has released. But overall I think her song selections have been right on the mark.

Second, people who are making similar comments are not necessarily "uniformed". An immature statement at best.

Third, not being a Ronstadt fan is no big deal. But denying a voice that can sing in almost any style is surprising. I may not like certain singers but I cannot deny that they are talented. Ronstadt has been called "maybe the best voice of her generation". Some things cannot be denied even though you want to very badly.

Fourth, Ronstadt is an artist beyond all else. I wonder if her going in other musical directions hurt her chances. It is dumb if that is the reason. Or was it not kissing Wenner's rear?

The difference between Madonna and Ronstadt. Madonna would really want to be in the RRHOF. Ronstadt could care less. To her it is all about the music.

Posted by Daryl on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 20:28pm


I was surprised at the back and forth on this. Why people who are not fans of Ronstadt would be so adamant about her amazes me. Why would you care? I quit reading all of the posts but this one really caught my eye.

First, I am not blindly loyal. I have not cared for every song Linda Ronstadt has released. But overall I think her song selections have been right on the mark.

Second, people who are making similar comments are not necessarily "uniformed". An immature statement at best.

Third, not being a Ronstadt fan is no big deal. But denying a voice that can sing in almost any style is surprising. I may not like certain singers but I cannot deny that they are talented. Ronstadt has been called "maybe the best voice of her generation". Some things cannot be denied even though you want to very badly.

Fourth, Ronstadt is an artist beyond all else. I wonder if her going in other musical directions hurt her chances. It is dumb if that is the reason. Or was it not kissing Wenner's rear?

The difference between Madonna and Ronstadt. Madonna would really want to be in the RRHOF. Ronstadt could care less. To her it is all about the music.

Posted by Daryl on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 20:28pm

Thank you Daryl for this well reasoned post. It was thoughtful, concise and really spoke to me about why I respect Linda Ronstadt so much. While I don't disparage Madonna or Donna Summer or other talented and successful artist, everyone does have their favorites but to adamantly be against someone they are not fans of or really have heard - amazes me too but it seems to common thing for ALL THINGS right now - "Forget the reasoning - just go straight to why you don't like it! - BAM"

Thanks again, and Ronstadt's albums have changed my life!!

Posted by Mike Hall Phillips on Wednesday, 10.3.07 @ 13:40pm


I think the fact that the vast majority of her big hits were remakes of earlier hits really works against her. It's not just that she didn't write her own material during a time when Joni Mitchell, Carly Simon, Carole King, etc. all did, but that she basically made a mint by recycling songs that had already proven successful. It doesn't take a whole lot of creativity or imagination to do that, especially when the interpretations never stray very far from the originals.

Add to that the fact that a number of these hits were originally done by black artists. In her day, she was accused by some of her detractors of being a 70's female version of Pat Boone, plundering the work of R&B veterans, watering it down for mass white consumption, and reaping the rewards. Probably more than a bit unfair, but this assessment likely has remained in the minds of the nominating committee members.

Yes, she had a powerful voice, and a lot of hits. But her overall musical legacy is a bit weak, IMO. I do like her though, I grew up hearing her on the radio constantly, and it certainly wouldn't piss me off if she were to get in.

Posted by ezwriter on Wednesday, 10.3.07 @ 21:02pm


she made a mint by recycling songs that had already proven successful.
Add to that the fact that a number of these hits were originally done by black artists.
Wednesday, 10.3.07 @ 21:02pm

Interesting and no doubt some people agree with this, pardon me, but it sounds like a white person talking, as myself, a black person, i don't care and love her voice and her contribution to my music catalog. IMO, WRITING, DID BECOME OVERRATED IN THE 60'S AND BEYOND - THIS EFFORT IS SUPPOSE TO VALIDATE YOU AS A TRUE ARTIST? I don't think writing did this. The term recylcing doesn't give credence to the greats like Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra and Billy Holliday (whom i might add is an influence in the RRHOF museum)didn't recycle other peoples written songs songs but INTERPRETED for a whole new audience to appreciate and love. This is what Ronstadt did in the 70's and beyond. She RESPECTED the audience so much, she cared about what they heard. And obviously she MADE A CONNECTION with the vast population, if being that she, as you say, was on the radio a whole bunch of times. But I think she also brought voice to many NEW SINGERS AND SONGWRITERS whom people probably wouldn't have been heard by A LOT OF PEOPLE, such as Warren Zevon, Elvis Costello, Bonoff, Waldmen, buddy holly and even Hank Williams. not to mention people later being introduced to the the Tradional Pop of Gershwin and Cole Poerter.etc. So in that she really was generous. She shouldn't feel guilty for making a mint. Obviously, she brought joy to who listened. That's probably why people like you wouldn't cry if she got in. But people like me think she should get in for so much more.
To many people SINGING is where it's at, not too much credence is given to this ART, which I may ad is the only way a lyric jumps off the page and in to your ears, mind and heart.

Posted by John T. Lutz on Wednesday, 10.3.07 @ 21:24pm


Just Like writers are told "write what you know" Singers sing "what they know"

And Ronstadt doesn't sing anything that isn't AUTHENTIC TO HER. Basically anything she didn't hear as a young kid. In that, she appears to be a great ADVOCATE of a songwriter. WE NEED MORE ADVOCATES IN GENERAL IN THE WORLD OF OURS.

I understand this because my love of music and rock music, as a kid, was singing to Elvis Costello, Bon Jovi(yikes, shy), Nirvana you know the 80's 90's radio stuff.

But I love music and I appreciate this tradition. Tradition and Music matters to Ronstadt and to a lot of people and I think this is cool and worthy.

Posted by Writers Rule on Wednesday, 10.3.07 @ 22:05pm


To John T. Lutz,

Just to set the record straight, I am Latino (like Ronstadt herself), not white. And if you'd read my entire post, you would have understood that I was merely putting out what back in the 70's was a fairly common criticism of her. In fact, I said that it was probably unfair. Nevertheless, it is out there, and it very possibly could be in the minds of the nominating committee people, most of whom were around back then.

I don't think it's accurate to compare Sinatra & Billie Holiday not being songwriters in the pre-rock era to Ronstadt not being one in the 70's. In the pre-rock era, composers composed, and singers sang. Nobody expected Sinatra to write his own material, just like nobody expected the Gershwins or Cole Porter to get up on stage and sing. The emergence of Dylan and the Beatles changed the rules of the game forever. Since them, artists who don't write their own material are seen being as a notch beneath those who do in the credibility department. Agree or disagree, that's just the way it is now, and it affects the perception of an artist like Linda Ronstadt's musical legacy.

OK, so she was an interpreter of others' material. The focus then becomes the material she chose to interpret, what she did with that material, whether her versions are considered by most to be the definitive versions of those songs. Those are the key questions for an artist like Ronstadt. I have my opinion as the what the answers are, obviously you have yours, and the members of the nominating committee are going to have theirs. For me personally, she comes up a little short.

I'll tell you what I've always really admired about her, though. When she was cast in "Pirates of Penzance", this woman, who was already a hell of a singer, actually went and took voice lessons, and became less of a belter and a much more subtle, emotionally connected singer, while also adding to her range substantially. That's something you rarely see a top artist ever do. Unfortunately, she then went off and used her new, improved voice on a series of non-rock projects, so it probably isn't going to help her get into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Posted by ezwriter on Thursday, 10.4.07 @ 14:43pm


Ronstadt should be considered just as original as original as any artist than any other who has had such longevity has hers.
What did Janis Joplin do that was so original?, she stole "piece of my heart" from Erma Franklin- Aretha's sister. She only released three albums, one released posthumously following her death. What made her a legend was the FACT THAT SHE DIED then "Me and Bobby McGee" and "Mercedes Benz" would top the charts for weeks in 1971. Yet she was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1995, and is still today considered to be one of the most original and talented "white female" blues artists of all time?
OK , HERE'S THE REASONING
The fact that she was white and allegedly "paying homage" black singers is original? what is the reasoning? "well, she's not taking credit from black singers she's actually helping them" ..oh please what stupid reasoning

Ronstadt has been more successful than Joplin and has influenced countless female rock singers. And I'm glad she went on to do things OTHER than rock. how boring to stay in the same field and in concerts, recycle your old hits.
So what if she didn't write most of her hits , who does?? and please Carly Simon ad Joni Mitchell were not nearly as successful as Ronstadt and really the musical choices were much more maudeline, slow and too cerebral - NOT ROCK.

The critics of Ronstadt - at the time who criticized her for not writing, were a bunch of sexist pigs, that resented Ronstadt being attractive, determined,and her ability to survive in a male dominated environment, but they just wanted to peg her a chick singer, that's all. That's really is it.

There is nothing that Ronstadt has done that isn't any different than any other rock female singer, and leave rock and not die of an overdose.

Posted by Shelby on Friday, 10.5.07 @ 13:11pm


Ronstadt should be considered just as original as original as any artist than any other who has had such longevity has hers.
What did Janis Joplin do that was so original?, she stole "piece of my heart" from Erma Franklin- Aretha's sister. She only released three albums, one released posthumously following her death. What made her a legend was the FACT THAT SHE DIED then "Me and Bobby McGee" and "Mercedes Benz" would top the charts for weeks in 1971. Yet she was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1995, and is still today considered to be one of the most original and talented "white female" blues artists of all time?
OK , HERE'S THE REASONING
The fact that she was white and allegedly "paying homage" black singers is original? what is the reasoning? "well, she's not taking credit from black singers she's actually helping them" ..oh please what stupid reasoning

Ronstadt has been more successful than Joplin and has influenced countless female rock singers. And I'm glad she went on to do things OTHER than rock. how boring to stay in the same field and in concerts, recycle your old hits.
So what if she didn't write most of her hits , who does?? and please Carly Simon ad Joni Mitchell were not nearly as successful as Ronstadt and really the musical choices were much more maudeline, slow and too cerebral - NOT ROCK.

The critics of Ronstadt - at the time who criticized her for not writing, were a bunch of sexist pigs, that resented Ronstadt being attractive, determined,and her ability to survive in a male dominated environment, but they just wanted to peg her a chick singer, that's all. That's really is it.

There is nothing that Ronstadt has done that isn't any different than any other rock female singer, and leave rock and not die of an overdose.

Posted by Shelby on Friday, 10.5.07 @ 13:11pm


To Ezwriter,

While I appreciate your point of view, the problem I have with it is that you are basing your opinion on only Ronstadt's biggest hits. Her hits represent only a small percentage of her total output. She is/was one of the biggest selling album artists of all time and her entire body of work should be considered, not just her hits. The biggest problem I have with the Hall Of Fame is that the criteria seems to be so arbitrary, depending on who is being considered. Self-penned material is required for some but not for others. Last year, Percy Sledge was inducted for basically one song, When A Man Loves A Woman. It's a great song, no doubt but does it really deserve to be held in higher regard than Ronstadt's entire catalogue and the breadth of her talents? I think not. It is obvious to me, that in the case of Ronstadt, her exclusion is deliberate and personal. Bonnie Raitt was inducted immediately following her mega success in the mid 1990s. Although she had been around for years, most people in the general public had not heard of her. For years, Robert Christgau, who was on the nominating board at the time, was unable to write a review of Raitt's work without a negative comparison to Ronstadt. Her induction was obviously also a deliberate slap in Ronstadt's face.
INDUCT RONSTADT NOW.

Posted by Mike on Saturday, 10.6.07 @ 13:36pm


To Mike,

Thanks for the response. I'm not sure I follow the logic of you suggesting that Percy Sledge was inducted for a single song, but Ronstadt's entire body of work must be considered. It seems contradictory: you're judging Percy Sledge one way, based solely on his one huge crossover hit, while at the same time asking that Ronstadt NOT be judged based solely on her hits.

At any rate, I do agree with you, sort of. Thinking about what you wrote led me to come up with what could be a pretty strong argument in her favor. Not so much because she sold a crapload of albums (so did Barry Manilow), but more because she was what was back then referred to as an "album artist". For those who weren't around back then, the big musical divide in the 70's was between AM and FM radio. AM radio was mainly the haven of the mainstream, Top 40, singles-oriented "pop" artists like The Carpenters, The Captain & Tennille, ABBA, and the like. FM radio was mostly for the artists who were considered cooler, more musically serious and legitimate. On FM, they didn't just play an artist's singles, they would play a lot of album cuts that AM listeners never heard.

It's to Linda Ronstadt's credit that she was hugely and consistently popular and successful on both AM and FM. While AM pop fans were loving "You're No Good" and "Blue Bayou", the FM fans were going crazy for "Willin'", "All That You Dream", and a bunch of other album cuts that were FM classics of the time.

Just about all of the artists that were simultaneously huge on both AM and FM radio in the 70's are in the HOF: The Stones, McCartney, Stevie Wonder, Elton John. I have to admit that when I look at that list, the absence of the name Linda Ronstadt seems like a glaring omission (as does Chicago.)

Of course, looking at her album output, there is also the argument that her albums were very formulaic: a couple of old R&B covers, a couple of country classics, a rock oldie, and fill out the rest with songs written by the usual suspects (did she ever put out an album in the 70's that didn't have at least one song by J.D. Souther?). Her version of Lowell George's "Willin'" got a good reception of FM radio, so her next album had another Lowell George song on it. She had hits with Buddy Holly's "That'll Be the Day" and Smokey Robinson's "Tracks of My Tears", so of course she goes on to put out "It's So Easy" and "Ooh Baby Baby". And so on.

Still, I think I've officially gone from slightly on the "no" side to at least on the fence, and possibly leaning towards "yes"...

Posted by ezwriter on Tuesday, 10.9.07 @ 20:36pm


Linda Ronstadt keeps getting snubbed by the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame... She is more deserving now than any artist out there..Her voice was and is phenomenal,her music is great and diversified, she was so influential in many genres of music including rock n roll...I don't understand it,, she isn't even being nominated... Donna Summer has been this time... donna was great disco/dance diva but not rock n roll artist... what gives? Hopefully soon the voters will come to their senses..

Posted by joshua bolt on Wednesday, 10.10.07 @ 10:30am


To ezwriter:

Thanks for your response and additional comments. I'm glad you are starting to see the light (wink). I may not have effectively stated my view and I understand your confusion. I was trying to point out how the induction criteria seems arbitrary depending on the artist being considered. I get the feeling that any discussion about an artist's possible nomination (among the nominating committee) starts with somebody saying "I like so-and-so", rather than an informed debate which regards all eligible artists and their credentials . I used Percy Sledge as an example because I have only heard one song by him, the huge hit "When A Man Loves A Woman" (WAMLAW). It is a beautiful, soul ballad, that after reading the notes on the R&RHOF website, I now realize preceded several R&B chart hits. I absolutely love "WAMLAW", but speaking as a member of the general public, I would never have expected to hear his name come up for nomination. I am not saying that his induction is not deserved, but given his record of recordings and hits, and applying that standard to other artists, his successes are far less than many others. Ronstadt may not have had a hit like WAMLAW (well technicaly she did with Blue Bayou which was a huge hit on both pop and country charts although personally, I think her version of Long, Long Time rivals WAMLAW in terms of beauty, and heartache and although it may not have been classified as SOUL ((so what? it was told from the point of view of a broken hearted white girl instead of a black man))it was nominated for a grammy award) but her overall catalogue is much more impressive than his on many levels. One only has to read Ronstatd's summary on wikipedia.com for evidence of this.
Similarly, Ronstadt seems to be criticized because most of her HITS were covers but there are many artists already inducted who also did not write the majority of their own material. Why is the rule there for one and not the other?

Posted by Mike on Thursday, 10.11.07 @ 08:59am


First off, I think it is idiotic that Linda Ronstadt is not in the R&R Hall of Fame. Say what you will about some of her musical choices - it is obvious that she was a trailblazer and influential and no one can dispute that she was the first female rock superstar who was not part of a group. Not until Madonna, was there a woman with the same level of sustained impact. Furthermore, there was always a level of artistic integrity in her music, even with the the hits that were obviously recorded to generate radio play.

I think there are a few factors at work here.

First off, Linda has moved as far away as possible from the arena -packed visibility of her commerical peak. She has veered so far away from the rock idiom that it would be a stretch to even put her in that genre. It is clear that she has parlayed her success in rock music into the freedom to explore all sorts of musical horizons with varying degrees of success. In doing so, she has vocally eschewed the sort of music that gave her her success, expressing a dislike of guitar based rock music in particular and the music of the late 20th century in general.

Second, while Linda Ronstadt was popular with the masses, she never was a ciritc's darling. Generally, the male-dominated rock press painted her as a willing pawn in the hands of her producers (specifically Peter Asher). While conceding the remarkable quality of her voice and grudgingly acknowleging that "Heart Like a Wheel" was a great album, they generally dismissed her as a cover artist and when she moved away from rock they dismissed her altogether. Dave Marsh is the quintessential Ronstadt basher and I wouldn't be surprised if he's one of those who's been blackballing her all these years. I think there's a distinct whiff of misogyny in most of their criticism - as if an attactive, feminine interpretive singer couldn't possibly have relelvance. The rock world of the 70s was a very masculine place.

Third, I think that Linda herself could care less that she is not in the hall of fame. She has been openly dismissive of all types of accolades through the years. I am paraphrasing here, but I believe she once told Johnny Carson that "I have never felt I could afford the luxury of worrying about prizes" when asked how many Grammys she had won (11, by the way). I think that most living people who are in the Hall of Fame got there in part by campaigning for the honor. This is not to denigrate their talent, but you'd have to be totally naive not to believe that agents, flunkies and press hacks don't have a hand in it either. If the artist herself is not driving this effort, it will probably not happen.

Finally, she has a rocky relationship, at best, with Jann Wenner and Rolling Stone over the years. While theirs was a mutually beneficial relationship through the mid to late 70s there was a distinct souring at the dawn of the 80s. Maybe, they decided she was old hat, maybe she decided she was not going to pose in any more lingerie for them but I do know that she denounced their "hipper than thou" mentality and has not graced their cover since the Carter Administration (unless you count their lastest anniversary cover where she can be found with some searching).

I don't think her political views are a factor and, if anything, they work in her favor.

Posted by Cary on Sunday, 10.21.07 @ 17:39pm


Linda's not being in the RRHOF is so ludicrous that it makes me wonder if something's going on that is unrelated to her obvious qualifications. This situation reminds me of Waylon Jennings and the Country Music Hall of Fame that he hated. Even though Waylon was one of country's biggest acts ever, year after year went by after Waylon was eligible for the CMHF and they did not elect him. Why? Because Waylon had made it clear that, if elected, he would not come to their induction ceremony. So they waited until he was on his deathbed and was not physically capable of attending their ceremony before they elected him. It was one of the more notable episodes of cowardice in the history of show business.

In Linda's case, I suspect it may be a little different. I suspect that the RRHOF is concerned that, if they elect her, she will say something "inappropriate" at the induction ceremony they prize so much. She was, after all, not a model of sweetness on many occasions in the past. But that should be no basis for keeping her out of the Hall. The RRHOF should take a shot of courage and get on with electing the lady.

Posted by Ed on Thursday, 11.22.07 @ 00:26am


Right. The RRHOF elected The Sex Pistols (no threat of embarrassing statements there), yet they are afraid to elect Linda Ronstadt because she might say something embarrassing? The music industry is not exactly a bastion of conservatives. They are, by and large, whiny liberals just like Ronstadt. You think they haven't elected her because they are afraid she might (gasp) make a political proclamation against George W. or the Iraq War in her acceptance speech? I don't think that is why they have not nominated her. They haven't nominated her because they don't dig her music. Nor do I. But that is no reason not to nominate someone. But in the Jann Wenner/Dave Marsh/Jon Landau Rock Hall of Fame, all that matters is whether those three guys like your music.

Posted by dezmond on Thursday, 11.22.07 @ 09:11am


"All that matters is whether those three guys like your music."

Exactly, and a total bullshit system...

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 11.22.07 @ 10:39am


"..you do realize that it is "personal" thing with hall voters?" -anon (from the Rush page)

"They haven't nominated (Ronstadt) because they don't dig her music." -Dezmond

Not that I don't heartily condemn the current path that the Rock Hall denizens are taking, but isn't it reasonable to think that if you created a museum/club then you would put who you choose = like in it? Unlike sports stats, the judgment process for this place is so intrinsicly subjective that when you think about it, how can we really fault them for accessing their personal taste?

Posted by shawn on Friday, 11.23.07 @ 09:39am


I see your point Shawn and to some degree that is true. But, one would hope that there could be some degree of "objectivity." I know I am objective about it. For instance, I do not like the music of the Velvet Underground, but readily admit that they were influential and deserve induction. So, there is a case of personal dislike, yet a willingness to admit the need for induction. Hence, objectivity.

Posted by Anon on Friday, 11.23.07 @ 09:56am


I agree with Anon, here. You would hope that the "experts" on the Committee would be big enough to put personal taste aside and at least try and be objection. Like Anon's example, there are several inductees that I personally do not like but at the same time I would not hesitate to induct them because I understand that they were too influential or creative to ignore. On the flip side of that coin, I've got some bands that I personally really like, but would not put them up for Rockhall induction.

So if I can summon that kind of objectivity, and Anon can do so...then why can't Wenner, Marsh and Landau? Because they have been entrenched in their power positions as tastemakers and commentators on rock and roll for so long, they cannot see beyond their own opinions. They have held so much sway in the past that they think their opinions have become fact.

Would a music reviewer for Wenner's magazine ever dare give U2 or Springsteen less than a four star review nowadays? Of course not, they would be fired. Wenner has decreed that all U2 or The Boss touches turns to gold. (I am a fan of both, but not blindly so. They have both released crap at times). Anyway, so it goes. Those three are well known prog-rock haters, therefore no significant prog band has even been nominated (Pink Floyd isn't really prog).

We need term limits on the Committee.

Posted by Dezmond on Friday, 11.23.07 @ 14:59pm


Heck, sometimes I wish that they'd just put their own personal preference above advertisement/corporate requirements (see Nirava)

Posted by liam on Friday, 11.23.07 @ 15:03pm


"Because they have been entrenched in their power positions as tastemakers and commentators on rock and roll for so long, they cannot see beyond their own opinions." -Dezmond

Good point and well said. I guess we could hope that those who were presumtuous enough to construct a Hall of Fame would have the wisdom of humility and pay attention to what other journalists and musicians and pundits think.

My point was that since it WAS Wenner, Marsh and Landau's baby it might be reasonable to assume that when subjectivity comes into play, their's would be king ---- BUT to exist in a bubble of their own taste to the point of arrogant prejudice and stubborness does in the end hurt their creation and damage it's credibility.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 11.23.07 @ 21:03pm


Anyone who thinks Linda has "a pleasant voice, nothing special" clearly is not familiar with her career other than the radio hits. Her vocal ability is phenomenal.

Posted by Beau Bradlee on Saturday, 11.24.07 @ 16:25pm


And what idiot selected Round Midnight as her essential album. That would have to be Heart Like a Wheel.

Posted by Beau Bradlee on Saturday, 11.24.07 @ 16:27pm


At this point it would be an insult to induct Linda Ronstadt into the hall of fame. It is controlled by a few people who have their favorites and are playing politics with the rest. I think the current judges need to be ousted before Linda's induction would mean anything. I doubt she cares one way or the other.

And as far as Linda not writing most of her music I say THANK GOD! Imagine the gems we would never have heard had that been the case. That incredible voice needs to be heard on the best written music and not wasted on some egoistic musings and yet the few songs Linda has written are quite good with Winter Light being one of my favorite songs ever.

As far as remakes, Aretha Franklin is probably the Queen of the Remakes but I don't hear any complaints about that. Few singers can even get away with successful remakes that become the definitive versions.

Besides, one need not tear down other musical greats to build up their favorites. Linda Ronstadt is one of a kind and something very special.

Posted by ronstadtfanaz on Tuesday, 11.27.07 @ 18:49pm


Linda belongs in the Country Rock Hall of Fame, not the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, but that goes for a lot of other inductees, too. Take Aretha, what the heck is she doing there? My issue with Linda is that in spite of her extremely beautiful voice, her music falls into that category with James Taylor, Kenny Logins, Jackson Browne, post-Beatles Paul McCartney and Michael Bolton.

Need I say more?

Posted by joe on Sunday, 01.6.08 @ 19:21pm


Need you say more? Probably, because I don't get what you're saying. James Taylor, Jackson Browne, and post-Beatles McCartney are in the Hall of Fame. Michael Bolton is just a hack. The committe has a narrow view of what is rock when they choose, and an expansive view of what is rock when they want to induct one of their favorites. Linda has been a "rock singer" at one point in her career. To her credit, she is capable of much more, and that capability apparently makes her too good for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Posted by Syed on Tuesday, 01.29.08 @ 16:07pm


Linda Ronstadt is overlooked because of Jann Wenner founder of Rolling Stone Magazine. He hates her because she personally jilted him.
She discovered The Eagles for Christ sake. She deserves to be in by now.

Posted by JasonsMusicPage on Sunday, 02.24.08 @ 16:22pm


"The fact that she had more number one hits than Elvis Presley, CCR and Journey COMBINED should establish her credentials for the Hall."- Joe

If we are determined to make statistical statements (which should have a SMALL part in the induction process), which I am guilty of too, at least try to be accurate;

Elvis Presley- 18 No. 1 hits

Linda Ronstadt- 1 ("You're No Good)

Ronstadt is a fine performer...just please be accurate with your statements.

Posted by Terry on Sunday, 02.24.08 @ 17:11pm


I liked Linda, but she is not a RnR icon. She was a pretty voice who made some good music. Her crossover into Country has been excellent and I think she will receive all kudos in this genre. I just don't see the HoF for her.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 02.24.08 @ 21:06pm


Linda is one of a kind. I remember fondly warm summer nights in Michigan and her belting "love you and lose again". The internal politics of the HOF with Jan Wenner certainly must impact her inducation. Being from the 70s I can tell you Rolling Stone (owned by Wenner) was downright personally at times hostile to Linda "have another enchilada Linda" and of course in a very sexist industry (though RS certainly drove some sales early on). I personally would not bother even going to the HOF without her induction - and that is kind of sad as it is only 2 hours from my home near Motown.

Posted by Gerald on Thursday, 02.28.08 @ 17:29pm


Besides an unwritten rule at the HOF seems to be an algorithm with benefits for:

Die at Peak
Underpriviledged Upbringing
Male
Songwriter
Gay Icon

Based on this, Linda unfortunatley I think was viewed as classic successful Americana (except of course politically), which is something our country seems to culturally have an inner hatred for.

At the end of the day her shimmering vibrato and vocal dexterity and influence on so many should have made her one of the first inductees.

Posted by Gerald on Thursday, 02.28.08 @ 17:40pm


MOST SUCCESSFULL FEMALE ARTIST OF THE ENTIRE DECADE OF THE 1970's.

she belongs.

Posted by D.K. on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 14:06pm


Linda Ronstadt will eventually get in. The problem the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has is trying to induct 50 years worth of deserving artists in a ten year time span. Have faith, she'll get in.

Posted by daddyak8 on Thursday, 03.13.08 @ 19:50pm


Ronstadt, just from a rock music standpoint. the fact that after 10 years throughout the 60's and early 70's, of touring and recording, by 1976 and so forth, she became the first female touring artist of significant note to compete on the same level with males and primarily male dominated musical acts means that she wasn't all about studio recording. this is commercially significant. She was an ALBUMS artist. Her singles hits were numerous too but she chose her songs well and she was more marketable than any female at the time, thus opening the door for many others to come. she set the standard for a lot of other women, to get the biggigs, big record contracts and be taken seriously. She wasn't part of a group or had men control her act or front her musical whims. she belongs.

Posted by continental on Tuesday, 04.1.08 @ 20:26pm


Linda Ronstadt has had, and continues to have, one of the most beautiful voices in the world. She can sing ANYTHING! Look at her catalog of albums....COUNTRY (yes), ROCK (yes), AMERICAN STANDARDS (yes), OPERETTA (yes), SOUNDTRACKS (yes) and the list goes on! She also has the respect of so many artists....too many to name. She is long overdue for induction! She should also be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Posted by George on Friday, 04.4.08 @ 17:47pm


Linda Ronstadt is my favorite since "Long, Long Time". What a voice. What a lady.

Looking at this HOF, and the "requirements", and the stuff on this board, she should not be in this HOF. A lot of her work is too ballad-y. The production quality of her albums are too strong. The bulk of her work is not rock and roll. Sure, there were the 8 consecutive platinum albums, and she was the first female to get 3 in a row. IS that enough to get into the R&R Hall of Fame? Well, the judges, who certainly know more than I, don't think so.

Then the 3 superb albums with Nelson Riddle. Well, she deserted her "roots". (Actually, her roots are Mexican music and Gilbert and Sullivan - another strike against her.)
Her multiple Grammy Cry Like a Rainstorm, too Adult Contemporary. (If you don't have Winter Light, get it. It may be a better album.) Her 3 Spanish Albums, Grammy winning, but not R&R. Too Hispanic. (Firenze is my favorite, and I don't speak Spanish). So she turned '50 Rock Classics into Lullabyes and got a Grammy in the CHILDREN'S Catagory - so what? CLEARLY NOT in the Rolling Stones cookie cutter. (my kid listens that album almost every night, and In My Room and Angel Baby are PERFECT, and Lennon's Good Night sends chills up my spine - doesn't matter). Her Grammys with Dolly and EmmyLou don't count either, because they are too country. And the Emmy she got, the Tony nomination, the Golden Globe nomination, a complete waste of time, since she turned her back on R&R.

She even spent more time doing backup for so many others, producing other albums and non-arena performing, instead of doing just R&R. Simply disqualifying behavior.

My conclusion: Linda Ronstadt's career is too varied, too independent, too successful for the pidgenhole R&R HOF. And the HOF is a joke for not including her in the first couple years that it could.

Posted by grat on Thursday, 04.17.08 @ 04:37am


Ronstadt not in the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame would be like the baseball Hall of Fame not admitting Jackie Robinson. This is a shame on the hall, but even more on its benighted voters.

Posted by Dan Riley on Thursday, 05.8.08 @ 10:12am


I'm guessing that one or all of those old farts, Wenner, Marsh, and Landau, made passes at Linda and she told them to go to hell. THAT's why they won't put her in their little museum.

Posted by RightSaidFred on Thursday, 05.22.08 @ 22:30pm


Or it's because her innovation is non-existant and her influence is minimal. That's my guess, anyway.

Posted by Liam on Friday, 05.23.08 @ 06:25am


Linda should be inducted. I think that she is, hands down, the best female vocalist of all time. She has opened up a whole genre of music for me.

Posted by katie on Wednesday, 05.28.08 @ 12:31pm


Liam, just keep guessing...stimulate your brain cell

Posted by Gerald on Wednesday, 05.28.08 @ 20:52pm


Linda does indeed deserve to be inducted; this crap that she "only did covers", or that her voice is "nothing special", completely misses the point. Linda has always been the most un-star like star since the beginning; those of us who KNOW what her voice does for us could care less what so-called critics and the Hall thinks....Viva Linda!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Adrian on Wednesday, 07.2.08 @ 21:43pm


Right on Adrian. Linda is one of the most unstar like Musical Stars in modern day history. Kinda like Garbo. She's not in your face, to prove how popular she can still be. She waits for the quality and looks for it. And to tell you the truth there is not much quality in popular music right now. But that is just one endearing quality about Linda Ronstadt.

As for the reasons why she is a pioneer in music. One of the the most important aspects of Linda Ronstadt's professional carrer is that it is a combination on many levels of successes that will be hard to duplicate, ever. Period. Some critics don't appreciate how successful she really is and was, not just in terms of chart success, commerical success, but add in her pioneering efforts at making women marketable as solo female acts ON THE CONCERT STAGE AND ARENAS, then add in the respect from her peers, add in her ability to sing and as an true artist, also add her own decisions at creating crafted mainstream music, add her own ability to choose good music and highlight unknown songwriters. She could have fallen flat on her face with these PATHS SHE TOOK but her courage paid off big and lead the way for music and musicians to be influential in their OWN product.

As far as the covers business. The word cover did not come out until the 1970's and its a baby boomer mentality. Ofcourse, this is the same generation that told Sinatra, Ella, Peggy Lee, and Tony Bennett to F off for the Beatles. And same generation that gave a condescending patronage to Chuck Berry. Ofcourse, Linda had the sense to sing Chuck Berry and honor him in 1978. She didn't have to. Same with Zevon she didn't have to. She did because Ronstadt knew good music and she was and is a good singer with mass appeal.

Last, her ability in the 1970 command arena patrons and audiences while being a woman and while having chart success - alone is monumental. It showed that a corporation didn't control her brand but public did. And for this she belongs in the Hall of Fame.

Posted by JacksonStroudPlumber on Saturday, 07.5.08 @ 14:05pm


May be if she hadn't broken up with Jerry Brown she'd be in.

Or maybe if she hadn't gone out with him.

If it weren't for Linda, many of what we think of as Female Rock Stars wouldn't even be known

Posted by Laz on Friday, 08.1.08 @ 13:56pm


Well, geez, it may be nice to have Linda Ronstadt in the hall, but honestly, who has she really influenced? Other than, say, Pat Benatar, Ann and Nancy Wilson (Heart), Christine McVie and Stevie Nicks (Fleetwood Mac), Debbie Harry (Blondie), and the list goes on...

In other words, induct her already.

Posted by Joe on Sunday, 08.3.08 @ 18:03pm


One of the best singers ever in my opinion! She can sing anything from any genre. It's so sad that Madonna gets inducted but Linds Ronstadt is left on the wayside.

Posted by Julie on Monday, 09.22.08 @ 22:21pm


One of the best singers ever in my opinion! She can sing anything from any genre. It's so sad that Madonna gets inducted but Linds Ronstadt is left on the wayside.

Posted by Julie on Monday

Can't agree any more She should be in RHOF

That is why God invented tomorrow lol
YES TO LINDA

Posted by mrxyz on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 00:56am


I don't understand why Linda Ronstadt has been snubbed by the RHOF. She has one of the best voices in the planet and was the First Lady of Rock N Roll.
It seems to me that the RHOF is racist and needs to really get it together instead of choosing one hit wonders that no one even remembers.

Posted by True Rocker on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 01:11am


don't understand why Linda Ronstadt has been snubbed by the RHOF. She has one of the best voices in the planet and was the First Lady of Rock N Roll.
It seems to me that the RHOF is racist and needs to really get it together instead of choosing one hit wonders that no one even remembers.

Posted by True Rocker on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 01:11am

She is not for the reason Madona is in.. She can sing ..As far as 1 hit wonders They have a place ... Sometimes that is all you need to change ROCK or give it a kick in the right direction
Yes to LINDA

Posted by mrxyz on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 01:18am


I agree with Cary post on why Linda's not nominated. (Cary I think you did an excellent job on your post.)

I think she has made too many enemies with many music writers and I don't think she is "in" with the music industry as she once was which maybe why she is not getting nominated. Her cover songs are great but I think they are still associated with the original artist and not her. My classic rock station doesn't play any of her song - is this the case with anyone else. Is she considered too Pop-Rock I guess.

Sad really - Great Voice and Talent

Posted by One Mic on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 22:19pm


Just read the 2008 RRHOF Nominees list. Once again Linda Ronstadt has not been nominated. What a Surprise. Let me review the following highlights of her long and successful career-
She has bee perfoming live for the past 5 decades with no pre recorded vocal dubs at her concerts ie Madonna and Mariah.
Sang backgrounds vocals on Neil Young's classic and only number one hit Heart of Gold.
Introduced the world to Emmylou Harris,Warren Zevon, Nicolette Larson,Karla Bonoff on her most successful albums.
The induction should be based on her talent and not that you are politically correct with these clueless critics.
I mean why is Chic being nominated!!!!!Freak Out???
Linda Rondstadt does not need the RRHOF. The RRHOF needs Linda Ronstadt!!!!!


Posted by vito on Thursday, 09.25.08 @ 01:03am


Vito, I agree with you about Chic but I think it has more to do with Nile Rodgers as a writer and producer then Chic itself which is sad because I don't believe they belong in the Hall of Fame over many artist.

Posted by One Mic on Thursday, 09.25.08 @ 11:26am


The fact that Linda Ronstadt has not been in ducted only reflects negatively on the Hall. It would seem that the organisation cares neither for the way a particular artist touched the record buying public nor the quality of the artist´s output. It is nothing short of disgraceful that someone who shaped the role of women in rock (and they know this full well) be kept out. My advice is, as a people care not for awards but for quality. Let others make a Hall for Songwriters if they so wish... we will still know what is worthy of our atention and what is not.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 11.8.08 @ 01:17am


Aside from that conciliatory post, there is the fact that Ronstadt's cover versions have been consistently beter than the originals, which poses a threat to the inductees......Ronstadt is a real problem for the RRHF because she showed that a lot of the recordings from the inductees were wanting, to say the least. The RRHF know this. The originals of When Will I Be Loved and Blue Bayou, to quote only two, are pathetic to say the least. Be patient, for the difficult job of interpretation will one day be recognised. Meanwhile, lay back and enjoy your records...Linda already has enough awards to fill a pretty large cabinet.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 11.8.08 @ 01:35am


You're joking, right Ruy? I don't have a problem with Linda Ronstadt, but no way are her covers better than the originals. Orbison's original "Blue Bayou" is a masterpiece, and quite honestly, Linda didn't really add anything to it (from a musical perspective, not a subjective taste one). The only thing she added to "When Will I Be Loved" is a bit more country-ish twang (which is also about the sum of what she added in her cover of "That'll Be The Day," also not superior to the original). Not much else. If it's just a matter of not liking Roy's or the Everly Brothers' voices, then that's your opinion and your tastes. But no way are the originals pathetic.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 11.8.08 @ 02:15am


Thank you Philip for your level-headed repost. I take back such a strong word as "pathetic", which I should not have used when speaking of two great acts, but still I think those two originals are not very good, let alone "masterpieces". I think the world of both Roy Orbison and the Everly Bothers, and several songs by them are among my favourites of all time. I just don´t think those particular two would have survived oblivion without Ronstadt, because they were not given the right treatment the first time around. Roy Orbison is surely one of the best voices rock ever had, but this is not apparent in the original "Blue Bayou". Which is probably why the single only made it to no. 29 way back then. As for "When Will I Be Loved", the original fails to capture any sense of desperation, and the lyrics are turned into a joke by the lack of sentimentality, it´s like....I feel like throwing a tantrum, will I ever be loved? To compare this with the immaculate recordings the EB left is what prompted me (wrongly) to call it pathetic.

Posted by Ruy on Sunday, 11.9.08 @ 01:10am


Still with you, Phil. As for "That´ll Be the Day", this is one of the worst songs by Buddy Holly, it is un-rescuable and it should never have been repeated....the lyrics are inane and the song as a whole is inferior to an entire legacy of great Buddy Holly songs.
So, in answer to your question, yes, I am speaking from the point of view of my own tastes.....I believe this is a valid stance and the reason these forums exist.

Posted by Ruy on Sunday, 11.9.08 @ 01:24am


The original version of "Blue Bayou" didn't climb too high on the charts because it was the B-Side. It's A-Side was "Mean Woman Blues," which went into the Top 10. In that perspective, it's pretty darn impressive that the song broke the Top 40. A double-sided Top 40 hit is a bit more difficult than Elvis or the Beatles made it look.

"When Will I Be Loved" has survived. I hear the Everly Brothers' version much more often than Linda's. A Top 10 hit on its own, no less. I think there is some desperation, especially when they hit the "When", but a lot of that came from the natural timbre of Phil and Don's unique voices.

I'm sorry you don't like Buddy Holly's version of "That'll Be The Day." Honestly, the songs by Buddy Holly I don't like could be counted on one hand. That opinion aside, that song really is a true testament to Holly's talent. He sang all the parts and played all the instruments himself. The Crickets didn't contribute a note to it. But I really do like Holly's original. Has a swinging feel with just right touch of braggadocio to it.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 11.9.08 @ 02:45am


There's only one song that I ever really liked by Linda Ronstadt, and that was a remake of Karla Bonoff's "Someone To Lay Down Beside Me"...for whatever reason she just really grated on me. I did like "Different Drum" (which was written by Mike Nesmith of the Monkees) also, but that was the Stone Poneys, not just Ronstadt.

I know she's been listed as a singer-songwriter, but I always wondered if she'd ever turn anything she wrote into a hit. As for her versions of songs topping the original, my vote would be a resounding "no"...once again, just my opinion.

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 11.9.08 @ 07:33am


It is a coincidence indeed that she chose to cover precisely the three songs I didn´t like originally.......I wonder what would have happened if she had chosen "Only the Lonely," "All I have to Do Is Dream" and "Everyday"......for in these cases I think there is no room for improvement on the originals.

Posted by Ruy on Monday, 11.10.08 @ 22:48pm


Im 25 and only recently discovered Ronstadt... she's amazing and the fact that she is not in the R&RHOF is a crime. Listening to heer albums is like a musical history lesson - and I've yet to hear a better contemporary R&R singer (well, except for Chrissie Hynde, Kate Bush, and Patti Smith - they're pretty awesome too...). INDUCT LINDA!

Posted by Ray-O on Monday, 11.17.08 @ 22:28pm


"A whole generation, but for her, might never have heard the work of artists such as Buddy Holly, Elvis Costello, and Chuck Berry".

(Rolling Stone magazine)

Presumably the RRHOF know more than Rolling Stone magazine.........as much as a bunch of fossils know about bungee jumping.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 11.22.08 @ 00:43am


lol, well, actually, a good number of people who are on the nominating committee or have a vote in the process have at one point or another worked for or been associated with Rolling Stone magazine.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 11.22.08 @ 01:43am


No doubt. LOL. So if they cannot remember why they had her on the cover SIX TIMES, they should step back and allow people who are under 70 in the commitee. And speaking of the number 70.....ah, the decade of gifted songwriters and TERRIBLE singers, the so-called "singer-songwriters" and their endless oozing of maudlin repetition. I do own "Tapestry", btw, it would just have been nice if the "singer-songwriter" could have actually sung.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 11.29.08 @ 01:32am


Actually, my point was that you were defeating your own argument. But you do raise a good point about singer-songwriters. Actually, most of the ones of the 70s weren't that bad of singers. They certainly weren't great, but they weren't too bad. For me, the problem was their inabilities as ARRANGERS. IMO, Gordon Lightfoot is just plain annoying, and a large part of it is his arrangements. Contrarily, I think Jim Croce did a great job of knowing what kind of arrangements worked with his songs (with the possible exception of "Operator"). But that scene of the 70's really cemented the paradigm that the Beatles planted: a band has to be mostly self-sufficient... they have to be able to play and write. Nothing wrong if you CAN do both, but I feel we may be missing out on some amazing voices or amazing lyricists because we're demanding that they be able to do it all.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 11.29.08 @ 03:01am


I'm kind of liking this two-man conversation, since obviously you do know what you are talking about. We agree that a great voice is a great voice and a great writer is a great writer and that in itself is worth much. You mention Croce, I would mention Cat Stevens. I think you can find value in a lot of things, for example I find Morissette great because of her songwriting, Annie Lennox for her voice, Pat Benatar because of the way she handled her career and a charming personality. In Ronstadt's case, while it is true that there is over-production in the albums it is also true that SHE sounded the same live. Surely this counts for something.....you must remember that she was the only one touring as Carly Simon, Carole King and the like did not (and to my knowledge they never did). It is one thing to write and record a song and wholly another to belt it out in front of tens of thousands, and to make that product as good as the recorded item. As for your Lightfoot comment I have a long list I would add (lkie Seals and Crofts and their endless supply of hideous songs). But it is good to remember that it was Ronstadt, the Eagles, Gram Parsons, Emmylou Harris, etc., who were actually on the road, not just on some chart.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 12.6.08 @ 03:02am


I would add John Denver and the group America to this list...great live performers and writers.

As for me, I don't question her talent as a singer. Most of her big hits WERE written by others...but so were Elvis'. I was in my late teens/early 20's during the height of her popularity, and the only thing that sticks out to me is that she got real steady airplay...as did a lot of the artists mentioned. Take the two Buddy Holly songs she recorded..."It's So Easy" and "That'll Be The Day"...she definitely added her own style to them. With Holly, besides writing the songs, it wasn't so much that he also recorded them, but the WAY he recorded them. He was doing things in the studio that had never been done before. I don't know that he was a great live performer (even though his TV performances were live and didn't sound too bad), but he was very influential and innovative. That's why I'm reluctant to compare artists...the really great ones are unique in their APPROACH to creating music or making a song their own.

She's a great singer and live performer...I'm just not sure how widely recognized her influence is...I really don't hear much about her anymore, and I haven't for years...

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 12.6.08 @ 07:48am


Well....you could always YouTube more recent things, I highly recommend "For a Dancer", albeit 10 years old.

I agree re: John Denver, 3/4-agree re: America.

It is amusing to me that we should still question (or mention) who wrote what song. We don´t say a BMW is a bad car because another invented the motor engine...I´m sure we all would love to own a couple. The whole thing is rather absurd, and there is enough room under the sun for writers, singers, singer-songwriters....in any event, people went ansd spent their $10 bucks over THIRTY MILLION TIMES on the Ronstadt "product," and that kind of outweighs any post in here, as I am sure if you bottled a new brand of detergent and it wasn't any good you would definitely not sell thirty million bags of it.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 12.20.08 @ 04:26am


Ummm....I know one doesn't bottle bags of anything, I'm just tired.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 12.20.08 @ 04:30am


Well, I gotta admit, I wouldn't put Cat Stevens in. Only song of his I like is "Peace Train." His cover of "Another Saturday Night" and his "Wide World" just irritate me. Voice is too important for me, when it comes to liking an artist. That's why I can't stand Alanis Morrissette or Annie Lennox (I don't like cold emotionless robot singing that a lot of synth-pop and new-wave bands of the 80's brought us, though in fairness, she sounded better when she was hitting the higher notes. They should have kept her in that upper register.)

Another voice I like is Don McLean. Not just American Pie (and he might get in just for that, although maybe not), but also Vincent, Dreidel, Castles In The Air, And I Love You So, etc. Good singer/songwriter who usually knew just the right touch to make a song sound right.

You'll probably despise me for this, but my favorite Linda Ronstadt song is "Different Drum" with the Stone Poneys. Her voice pealed through most magnificently in that song. She wasn't trying to add an extra inflection to fit the song style at all. It was a straightforward pop song, so she sung it straightforwardly. And she sounded magnificent on it. Like I said earlier, I don't have a problem with her getting in, she's just not near the top of my list.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 12.20.08 @ 17:48pm


Hey Philip, you can't stand Alanis Morissette? That makes two of us!! High five!!

Posted by Keebord on Saturday, 12.20.08 @ 19:48pm


Her best work was in Dogma when she didn't have to speak a word.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 12.20.08 @ 23:18pm


Not only are you not to be despised, you raise a very interesting point which adds to the thread as a whole. I remember an instance in 1978 when I was at school, when "Different Drum" was played on the radio and everyone started singing along to it....they all knew the words, etc. As I think back to that now, I wonder, is it business as usual that a single that only made it to no. 13 in the charts eleven years earlier is known so well by kids, by whose standards something three years old is ancient?

This points to the fact that DD had more lasting power than her big hits of later years. Are then there two Ronstadts to be avaluated...the naive but magnificent singer with the crappy production, and the one who owned the world and could get away with anything? Is this question reserved for Ronstadt, or is it true of any singer who eventually made it? Obviously DD is a great song sung by a great interpreter. that can hardly be argued.

It would be interesting, back on the covers theme, to compare Ronstadt's own "Winrer Light" (which she co-wrote) with the cover by the great Sarah Brightman. Both are great IMO.

I totally forgot about Don McLean, I loved his work and it actually started in me an interest in the works of Van Gogh which lives to this day.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 12.20.08 @ 23:49pm


If Linda gets inducted, it will be alone, and not with the Stone Poneys, "Different Drum" will be listed among the highlights of her career, and she may even be asked to perform that song at her induction.

But this is not unique to Linda either. Big Brother And The Holding Company were considered at one point, but I doubt that's happened since Janis Joplin got inducted as a soloist. And one of the biggest uproars on this site was how Smokey Robinson could be inducted without the rest of the Miracles, or Rod Stewart without Faces. I think for the most part, the career of the inducted is treated amalgamately, unless there's a chance that one of those phases is big enough to get inducted on its own (look at Clapton's three times for example.)

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 12.21.08 @ 00:01am


I don´t know what the case was with Big Brother, etc. In the case of the Stone Poneys they might as well not have existed. In the end Kenny Edwards ended up as a LR henchman in her platinum era, so it might as well have been just LR all along. It is beyond the shadow of a doubt that had it not been for her voice we wouldn´t know who the SP were.

I really don´t like Smokey Robinson, or any other sort of mush, with or without Miracles, or any of the rest of the Tamla/Motown issue. They should have a separate hall of fame somewhere.........how can you twist things to make that rock and roll? Rod Stewart should also not be in, he sold out to disco music when that was profitable.

As for Aretha Franklin, before anyone asks, I think there is a difference between singing and screaming. R-E-S-P-E-C-T is probably the worst thing I have ever heard, her discoish stuff of the 80s notwithstanding. I don't think any singer has been quite as overrated as she.

Posted by Ruy on Wednesday, 12.24.08 @ 02:19am


Actually, I can think of something worse. Rita Coolidge "Higher and Higher" "We´re All Alone". Shouldn´t there be a law against such stuff?

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 01.10.09 @ 02:04am


Ruy, full props to you for calling Aretha overrated. I quite agree. And I'm not a big Motown fan either... though I do love Martha And The Vandellas, Rare Earth, Temptations 1968-1972, pre-"Baby Love" and post-Diana Ross Supremes, a good deal of Stevie Wonder... ok, so I like a fair share of it, but when I want true soul music, I go for Stax/Volt.

I have to admit, I've never heard Rita's version of "We're All Alone." Only version I know is solo Frankie Valli's. Not a bad song, but not terrific either.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 01.10.09 @ 02:13am


And here I was thinking I would get my head bitten off re: the....was it First Lady Of Soul?? (chuckle).
I fully agree re: Martha and the Vandellas and especially Rare Earth. Good stuff and very much in the vanguard of things. Stevie Wonder was another faux pas of mine, he is such a genius that even though it isn't my kind of music I could never put him down. He is such an institution that I regard him as separate from what I termed the Tamla/Motown issue. No producer´s puppet, that one.
Temptations, Supremes, Diana Ross, pre- or post whatever always exemplified records made by a producer and I don´t like any era of any of them. Diana Ross has a very thin, powerless voice that would not have gotten her anywhere had she not first been a part of a very successful, if bubblegum, group. Predictably she went along with the times and did a lot of disco. I do not know if she is in the HOF but clearly she shouldn´t be.
If you haven´t heard WAA by Coolidge, trust me, you don´t want to. Another thin and powerless voice, a weak interpretation at best, but it made the top 10 in 1977 or 1978.
Just to make clear I have nothing against black singers, I thought Donna Summer was quite good. As a singer. Regardless of the material, which we know belongs in a dark, dark place in the realm of popular music.
It will be interesting to see how this thread gets back to Linda Ronstadt...hehe.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 01.10.09 @ 02:55am


Aretha's known as Queen Of Soul. Martha And The Vandellas, imo, were THE premiere "Rock 'n' Roll" act of Motown. What they did was the closest to pure rock'n'roll until Rare Earth came along. But I know how you feel. What you're sick of is the Motown that Oldies radio feeds you. I was the same way. I HATED the Supremes, the Four Tops, Marvin Gaye, Mary Wells, the Marvelettes, Stevie Wonder, the Miracles, etc. for such a long time because all I was getting exposure to was the overplayed pablum that was being played. I also hate Diana Ross's voice, but for opposite reasons! IMO, once they made it big, EVERYTHING that Diana sang simply REEKS of ego, HER ego. She always sounds so full of herself. But before that, there was some decent stuff. Do yourself a favor and check out "When The Lovelight Starts Shining In His Eyes" and "Buttered Popcorn" for example. Before her ego got big, that was some good stuff. And check out the Jean Terrell led stuff... "Stone Lone," "Up The Ladder To The Roof," "I'm Gonna Let My Heart Do The Walking"... Terrell is a much better singer.

Marvin Gaye... he just takes time, and even still, there are songs by him I can't stand. I prefer the earlier stuff... Pride And Joy, I'll Be Doggone, Can I Get A Witness... personal fave, though is the duet with Kim Weston, "It Takes Two."

Gladys Knight & the Pips... their last couple records with Motown are worth checking out, namely "You're The Best Thing That Ever Happened To Me" and "Neither One Of Us Wants To Be The First To Say Goodbye."

Four Tops... they'll also take time. I like "It's The Same Old Song", and "Reach Out (I'll Be There)" and "Ain't No Woman Like The One I've Got." Actually, those are pretty much the only three I really like.

Stevie sounds like you've figured out... if you haven't though, check out "Place In The Sun." Mind-blowing.

I still hate Mary Wells, and still not too fond of the Marvelettes, though the latter I would induct for their role in getting Motown off the ground.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 01.10.09 @ 03:16am


What is interesting about this is, how the public will identify somebody's output as part of a larger group. In the same way we speak of Tamla/Motown we could group together Ronstadt, the Eagles, Jackson Browne, etc. as "the Sound of L.A." or even "the sound of California". And people will tend to react to such labels and say they like that music or they don´t. This is usually enough to obliterate any possible interest in music they have already decided, without really hearing it, they don´t like. I was only a toddler in 1968, so I can't claim to know much about Stax/Volt and the like. What I do know is what the two genres of music sounded like in 1975 and after. By that time "country rock" (yet another label for same) had come into its own and the other stuff was going nowhere fast, lost in the morasses of commerciality. (Stevie Wonder was an exception to this, until the 80s when jhe joined the commercial heap).
I must insist that a large part of my admiration for Ronstadt, Eagles, Browne, et. al was how hard they worked and how they sounded live. No record, however great a recording, will ever win this kind of admiration from me if it smells of "we're only interested in singles and albums sales, and Casey Kasem's top 40". Which isn't to asy I think that is a bad thing, it just doen't thrill me if I can´t picture a really good live performance.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 01.17.09 @ 02:50am


Well, part of the reason for these labels is the similarities of sounds. Motown, because of their shared musicians, had records that had a lot of similarites in sounds heard. Same with Muscle Shoals and Stax/Volt, as well as Philly soul, and to a lesser extent, Cameo/Parkway, Merseybeat, and the New York Coffeehouse scene.

I don't know if you can say the same thing about Ronstadt, Browne, and the Eagles. I can hear some parallels between records like "Running On Empty" and "Take It Easy," but not so much between "Peaceful Easy Feeling" and "Stay." And "Somebody's Baby" doesn't really remind me of ANYTHING done by the Eagles or Linda Ronstadt.

I find the phobia towards labels understandable, but still laughable. Labels are useful tools. They help us know what to expect. Being able to compare artists' sounds to each other is treated as inherently evil because it insinuates that one or both aren't being original, but it denies the utility of making other things more accessible by having a point of reference. The fact that marketing and advertising plans use these labels to their advantage is just a fact of the human drive to earn money. Sometimes it's just about making a living, other times pure unadulterated greed. That doesn't and shouldn't take away from the utility. It doesn't compromise artistic merit. It's a descriptor, and art is often about trying to describe things in life, be it novel or a different perspective, or whatever.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 01.17.09 @ 03:37am


Not that the grammy's are anymore accurate than the HOF inducties, but the fact that Linda has won 11 of them and has been nominated for 18 says somebody on the board (JW) has their head up their arse. Linda is the epitome of female rock n roll! Not inducting her is like leaving out Roy Orbison. Politics, politics, politics! Run DMC? Metallica? Who's the next one to walk pass Linda? Kid rock?

Posted by dan on Saturday, 01.31.09 @ 14:09pm


Linda Ronstadt definitely belongs in the Hall of Fame. She belongs every bit as much as Jackson Browne and the Eagles. And far more than Bonnie Raitt or Little Anthony for that matter.

Posted by David S on Friday, 02.6.09 @ 01:48am


To Phil: Asylum Records was created specifcally so that Browne could have a recording contract. At a time when both the Eagles and Ronstadt were singing songs by Browne. Eventually Asylum hit the jackpot with Ronstadt and the Eagles, and only later with Browne. It was Asylum founder David Geffen who put the idea of the Eagles in Don Henley´s mind after they had spent some time as Ronstadt´s backup band. So, they all shared a label and songs in common when they were starting out.

To Dan: Nah, not Kid Rock.....the Ting Tings! In the year 2033. By that time the current board will hopefully be dead (not that they are not dead now).

To David: I couldn't agree more, in the sense of: did Raitt or Little Anthony ever make you daydream? LOL.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 02.7.09 @ 02:16am


To Phil: Asylum Records was created specifcally so that Browne could have a recording contract. At a time when both the Eagles and Ronstadt were singing songs by Browne. Eventually Asylum hit the jackpot with Ronstadt and the Eagles, and only later with Browne. It was Asylum founder David Geffen who put the idea of the Eagles in Don Henley´s mind after they had spent some time as Ronstadt´s backup band. So, they all shared a label and songs in common when they were starting out.

To Dan: Nah, not Kid Rock.....the Ting Tings! In the year 2033. By that time the current board will hopefully be dead (not that they are not dead now).

To David: I couldn't agree more, in the sense of: did Raitt or Little Anthony ever make you daydream? LOL.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 02.7.09 @ 02:16am


Ruy, thanks for the info. It helps, but it's kinda beside the point. My point was you wouldn't necessarily know that the Eagles, Browne, and Ronstadt were on the same label because their songs didn't sound too similar to each other, unlike Motown and Stax/Volt which had unmistakable musical fingerprints all over the records from them.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 02.7.09 @ 03:07am


In any event, you are praising the Eagles, Browne and Ronstadt. "Unmistakable musical fingerprints" is precisely what we don´t want!

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 02.14.09 @ 23:15pm


Not necessarily. "Unmistakable musical fingerprints" is how we got the Wall Of Sound, the Motown Sound, the sounds of Muscle Shoals... it's not an inherently bad thing.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 02.14.09 @ 23:56pm


It sounds to me as if you have never listened to a Ronstadt album....am I correct? Because it´s impossible to have any idea what she was about from the hits (singles). Maybe this is the cause of the misunderstanding (if it exists). Incidentally, in 1989 she nade a "Wall of Sound" album, complete with Brian Wilson and a 50-piece orchestra, etc., which earned her another few Grammys. It was totally deliberate, she said she had wanted to make a WOS record.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 02.28.09 @ 00:43am


I really don't see a misunderstanding as a disagreement. I don't think "unmistakable fingerprints" is a bad thing, and it seems that you do. That's just a disagreement.

Posted by Philip on Saturday, 02.28.09 @ 00:49am


Sorry, it was confusing the way I worded that. I wasn´t talking about that "fingerprints disagreement" (whether they are good or bad is a matter of taste); I was talking about the other "fingerprints disagreement" (whether they exist in Ronstadt-Eagles-Browne).

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 02.28.09 @ 23:13pm


lol ok. No, I said before I don't hear much in the way of similarities of Browne's, the Eagles' and Ronstadt's records. They all sound pretty different to me. Just because they shared a record label doesn't mean they had similar musical fingerprints.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 03.1.09 @ 00:20am


Linda Ronstadt was the first female solo rock artist to sell out arena concert tours. She was the first arena rock diva in rock 'n roll.

Grace Slick, Joni Mitchell, Janis Joplin, Tina Turner, and pop stars like Diana Ross, Aretha Franklin and Olivia Newton-John, all contemporaries of Ronstadt were not able to do this.

Linda broke through the glass ceiling for female stars in the 1960s and 1970s, and for solo female rockers.

Ronstadt was the Queen of Rock 'n Roll for decade in the 1970s (people forget that), and she had a very successful career in pop, pop-rock, country, and Mexican music in the 1980s.

Linda Ronstadt paved the way for Heart, Stevie Nicks, Debby Harry, Chrissie Hynde and Pat Benatar.

Ronstadt is truly versatile, far more so than media & critic darlings like David Bowie and Madonna.

And Linda Ronstadt has a better voice than Barbara Streisand or Whitney Houston.

It's 2009. Why isn't Linda Ronstadt in the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame?

And why aren't her peers Pat Benatar, and Ann & Nancy Wilson of Heart in the Hall of Fame, either?

Posted by Aidan on Thursday, 03.5.09 @ 20:46pm


So let me get this straight Maddona IS IN.. AND LINDA ain't? Hmmm now that is very strange...
YES and past DO

Posted by mrxyz on Thursday, 03.5.09 @ 21:51pm


The induction this year of Wanda Jackson heightens the injustice of the omission of Linda Ronstadt. While it is great to see the female pioneers of rock honored, it is strage that the one who was arguably the most successful is still on the outside. And given the fact that almost all of those with whom she worked during her "classic period" are enshrined, her exclusion seems even more odd.

Posted by Skip on Friday, 03.13.09 @ 16:15pm


It isn't really that strange, or odd. It depends entirely on who decides these things. If you asked Pat Benatar or Emmylou Harris, and probably the Wilson Sisters from Heart, it would indeed be an outrage. I´m sure Deborah Harry and Chrissie Hynde would agree, too. But the people on the board have not perceived the influence of Ronstadt like aspiring female rock artists did at that time, they just grope blindly in the dark to label someone or other "original". They will never stop to consider "wow, nobody ever sang like that", or "gee, she is so versatile, she can do anything". The fact that her originality lies elsewhere than in her songwriting is totally lost on them, just like your explaining calculus to a 10-year-old would be.
What all this really shows is the inadequacy of waiting 25 years. LR hit big fame when I was 12, and I remember perfectly how different and "original" she was. Retrospectives always lie.

Posted by Ruy on Sunday, 03.15.09 @ 00:55am


"wow, nobody ever sang like that", or "gee, she is so versatile, she can do anything". The fact that her originality lies elsewhere than in her songwriting is totally lost on them, just like your explaining calculus to a 10-year-old would be.

She is very talented and had/has great players She still performs and she sings like an angle.. The band is great and a plesure to hear..Not over produce just real good stuff.That Girl can sing
YES

Posted by mrxyz on Sunday, 03.15.09 @ 06:49am


Ruy...you may have a point. No matter if an artist makes a huge impact...if they don't stay in the limelight (using any means necessary) for 25 years, it seems people forget...including "the committee". That seems to be not just the case for Ronstadt, but a long list of others. I'm sure there's a lot of people who come on this site who don't even know who she is. Anyone with any recollection of the late 60's and through the 70's, and listened to the radio with any regularity had a day go by when they didn't hear her. Quite frankly, I can't remember the last time I heard her at all (of course, I pretty much assemble and MP3 my own playlists now...no need for a radio).

I think she had/has a great voice...a great talent... and I liked a bit of her stuff. I just wasn't much into her style. and like I've said before, I'm not sure who they deem "worthy" anymore...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 03.15.09 @ 09:30am


Gitarzan, the committee doesn't seem to forget certain people like Leonard Cohen, and Blondie who at the time of their inductions weren't exactly the center of attention. I think they do what every group of self-appointed elitists has done throughout history-recognize their friends and ignore everyone else.

As for the Ronstadt issue, I think doing covers has a tendency to date the artist doing them because when you redo a song from a bygone era, all you're really doing is updating the style from the previous time to a more current sound for the current time. That tends to work well initially; but as the years roll on then your remake's style also becomes dated, so you're looked at as being yesterday's news.

Posted by SG on Sunday, 03.15.09 @ 10:12am


SG...you bring up very good points. I think it's called "selective amnesia" on the committee's part.

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 03.15.09 @ 10:28am


A woman who is a legend in music industry. Sings almost every type of music you can imagine, explain to all of us why she has been overlooked. Her contributions are extraordinary, more so than many of the women already in the RHOF. Shame on this selection group who continue to ignore Linda Ronstandt. Her music speaks for itself. She has nothing else to prove to anyone. Who is this group that continues to ignore the obvious? They call themselves experts in music? I think not...

Posted by dee on Saturday, 04.11.09 @ 15:20pm


"Linda Ronstadt .. has made herself one of the biggest individual rock draws in the world. "
—Time Magazine, 1977

Ah, but these people are above even TIME magazine, dee.......they call it a Hall of Fame, then populate it with people noone's ever heard about ("this is who I THINK should have been famous")....but they can always change the name to Hall of Merit, or Hall of Our Subjective Opinion....It is a sad fact that losers hate winners, don't lose any sleep over it.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 04.18.09 @ 03:13am


OK, my 2 cents: she belongs for Blue Bayou alone. Check out the live version on YouTube, then see her & Chuck Berry do Livin' in the USA, backed up by Keith Richards. That's Rock n' Roll!

Posted by DLS on Saturday, 04.25.09 @ 14:52pm


Has Linda been a nominee before, or just discussed for consideration?

I think the covers possibly could have hurt her chances. I enjoy her voice, and her music, though.

Posted by JR on Monday, 04.27.09 @ 22:09pm


She once said she had no use for her rock songs or fans, the very people that enabled her to be able to do whatever she wanted musically. THAT is why she isn't in the HOF in my opinion.

Posted by dfree on Wednesday, 05.6.09 @ 13:01pm


Yes. This is true. She did disown her legions of fans and her entire body of work before 1983, and any music written before she was 10 (that would be 1956). Not to mention her treatment of the printed media as well as the recording industry, both of which she made quite clear she despised. I can´t believe all of us who know the story overlooked this *little* fact, but thanks dfree for bringing it up. This IS the real reason, and sadly enough it kind of closes the thread of argumentation, since it is abundantly clear that she has no desire whatsoever to be in the HOF.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 05.9.09 @ 04:07am


Ruy - the thread of argumentation on why Ronstadt should be in the RRHOF does not close with your argument.

In fact Ronstadt is rock in roll, the fact that she allegedly disowned the bad rock written songs of the post 1983 world, well I would too. Rock songs were well written by Linda's age of twelve, i.e, 1956.

The fact is she made a lasting impression in rock in roll, her attitude after her mark on history is irrelevent. Who cares what SHE THINKS its WHAT RONSTADT HAS DONE, HER WORK IS LASTING long after history.

Plus it is rock in roll to be defiant and be different and Linda Ronstadt epitomizes that. Her albums are great, productions solid, she's influences music makers and songwriters.
Ronstadt is the Female Elvis who just happend to live and you know what? really care about her audience by making more albums and bringing more music to peoples lives unlike Elvis and others who died young and yes, maybe even more selfishly. I like Elvis though, and Roy Orbinson and 1950's rock, blues and more.

Posted by DonKinger on Saturday, 05.9.09 @ 12:39pm


When I saw Linda Ronstadt in concert on August 21, 1996, at what is now the Sleep Train Pavilion, I almost left the show early because she was trying to put the audience to sleep. Even she sent a couple of her musicians early to bed. She closed with the song "Good Night" from the Beatles' White Album. John Lennon has a song on his "lmagine" album called "How Do You Sleep?" which was directed at Paul McCartney. If you play the line "The one mistake you made was in your head" backwards it becomes "Hey, poor Lindy, so mean gets him nowhere" David Oates, the founder of Reverse Speech said the "Lindy" is Linda McCartney, but it can also be a reference to Linda Ronstadt who acted like a mother to her musicians and sent them to bed early. I would hate to be a member of LR's band, going to bed before the conclusion of the show. I don't ever want to see Linda Ronstadt in concert again.

Posted by Aaron O'Donnell on Saturday, 05.9.09 @ 14:39pm


DonKinger, try to read slowly, it is the PRE 1983 songs she disowned. And she's the female Elvis? Fat with porkchop sideburns? If she would have died, or at least had her lips stapled shut she would be in the RRHOF.

Posted by dfree on Tuesday, 05.12.09 @ 00:47am


Aaron...get a clue, the thread is not about one instance 20 years after her heyday, or about personal experiences, but about the body of work of a performer over their creative life.
DonKInger, I agree with what you wrote. The female Elvis? Definitely. I understand that she should be in the HOF and if you read the whole thread you would realise that. To question whether she should be inducted or not is ABSURD, but what is not absurd is trying to understand why she hasn't been inducted. Musically the arguments could go on forever, those who don't really know her work will always see her as a singles artist and keep bringing up the covers theme, and those who do know it know her as an albums artist and how the singles are hardly worth an argumentation. Some like the singles, some don't....it doesn't matter.
Still, what you call my argument, which is actually dfree's argument, is correct. And, not content with stabbing at the music industry she then plunged into frontal attacks on the US governmen that led her to be thrown out from a famous venue in San Francisco, the fact that other superstars such as the Eagles and Phil Collins came to her rescue notwithstanding.
The point, DonKinger, is that being excellent is not enough, you have to play your cards to suit a goal, and obviously the HOF is not a goal ogf hers. And if you had made hundreds of millions of dollars and had a legion of hardcore fans, would the HOF keep you awake?

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 05.16.09 @ 04:03am


Ruy...I understand that you're obviously a big fan of hers, and she does warrant at least some consideration, but referring to her as the "female Elvis" is more than just a stretch...their careers and impact don't even closely compare. She compares and draws parallels to a lot of other artists that for some reason just aren't getting any consideration for the HoF, your guess is as good as mine why.

On the other hand, if Elvis wasn't inducted in a "Rock & Roll Hall of Fame", then there shouldn't even be one...

Posted by Gitarzan on Saturday, 05.16.09 @ 13:24pm


Reading back, DonKinger and I meant different things, it would seem. He actually meant it literally, the way you took it, Gitarzan ("In fact Linda Ronstadt is rock and roll"). My point is, since there never was a female Elvis (I don´t think anyone´s carrer, male or female, compare to his), if you had to choose someone for that whimsical title I would choose her, too.

Posted by Ruy on Monday, 05.18.09 @ 23:36pm


Linda's absence from the R&R Hall of Fame is a joke. When you look at the length and breadth of her career, the body of work, her influence on other singers, her collaborations with other singers, her range....what the heck is missing here?? I see some of the inductees who are getting in year after year and I just scratch my heads. The committee includes R&B acts and R&R acts that were - at best - nominally influential and whose careers lasted a couple of years. But Ronstadt? They ignore year after year. It's a joke.

Posted by Brendan on Thursday, 05.28.09 @ 20:58pm


All awards/nominations/inductions are nothing but an industry celebrating itself, be it the Oscars, Grammys, Emmys or the RRHOF. Some of them accurately represent some quality of output, or even an influence on the artists which followed, but most of them don't.
To remain in the Ronstadt era, take for instance the Olivia Newton-John Grammy win for Record of the Year for "I Honestly Love You". Record of the Year, no less, at a time when Ronstadt, Elton John, Led Zeppelin, Elton John, etc. were in their prime. Now listen to the ONJ record and yup, it is all surely a joke, for what else can it be?
But something is not a joke: the RIAA certifications for Ronstadt which are twice those of ONJ's.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 06.6.09 @ 05:07am


Without Linda, the RR Hall is worth nothing.

Posted by Roberto on Friday, 07.24.09 @ 22:38pm


She should be in She can really sing Lots of hits
YES

Posted by mrxyz on Friday, 07.24.09 @ 22:40pm


Roberto, do you even doubt it's worth nothing? Do you even know who half the people in there are?

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 08.15.09 @ 03:54am


Yes, she sang a lot of covers, but she often sang them BETTER than anyone else. AND she had impeccable style and taste in the music she selected to interpret. She brought many artists and songwriters a wider audience by singing their songs -- like Jimmy Cliff. Her 70's album Prisoner in Disguise was the first time I heard his song, "Many Rivers to Cross." Now I own many of his CDs. Is there a genre of music she hasn't conquered? She honored her Spanish heritage by recording Spanish music bringing a wider audience to this music. She could rock harder than any female rocker of her day, sing soulful r&b classics, warble country/western tunes, or sing early rockabilly a la Buddy Holly. She could do it all. She was obviously more than just a pretty face and a pretty voice. She was a "student" of rock and roll who really knew her subject.

Posted by MissMiscellanea on Sunday, 11.1.09 @ 19:34pm


Ronstadt and Rock'n Roll ? I guess I just haven't thought of her that way in such a long time. I "found" her in the late 60s or early 70s when I was a teen.

Born in 55 and with all kinds of music around most of my life I didn't learn to distinguish so definitely between genres. I've often been surprised by how music I'm familiar with is categorized by others. I never really got how Hank Williams wasn't Rock but Jerry Lee Lewis and Elvis were.

Ronstadt has such a clean, beautiful, and effortless voice that's also filled with emotion. I've sung much of my life -- church choirs, glee club, community chorale, barbershop chorus and quartets. I don't really know how well I sing most of the time. But if I knew it was anywhere near as good as Ronstadt has for the last 40 years I think I'd feel a lot better about my life.

Her music consoled me when I was a depressed and lonely teen and it still does today. But does she belong in the Rock N Roll HOF or the Country HOF or the Gilbert & Sullivan HOF, I'm not sure. I personally would say she's one that belongs in the "Music Hall of Fame". Putting Vivaldi in the "Barogue Hall of Fame" would understate his historical importance.

Innovation can mean many things. To me, you can do something innovative with a piece of music that's 100's of years old.... it's just harder. But much of "modern" music is not so much innovative as it is redundant and boring.

Pre-1900, a singer's legacy couldn't be preserved like a composer's could. I wonder how a voice like Ronstadt's or Karen Carpenter's or Pavarotti's will compare to others over the next 200 years.


Posted by Hal on Sunday, 11.29.09 @ 21:49pm


I was wondering, while watching the 25th anniversary of the RRHF tonight on HBO, if Linda Ronstadt had finally been inducted. Tonight, I see she still hasn't made whatever grade these people chose to follow in picking their canidates. What is wrong with this picture? By now it must be a huge issue with a great many people in the recording industry. They're all scatching their heads, too. I wonder if Linda even wants it, really. The woman is a legend! Let her in the door she helped build.

Posted by darden on Monday, 11.30.09 @ 00:19am


Wow! I just innocently typed in the query about Linda not being in RRHOF and I discover this has been going on for three years! It's incredible she's not in. Warren Zevon's in and if she didn't sing his songs nobody would know who was! That's not a knock on Warren but c'mon the Eagles were here back up band. Geez. In her recent concerts she talks somewhat disparagingly of her rock years so I think she's a little bitter. Let's get her in and soon, I'm not gonna be around forever and either is she! Still got the great pipes tho.

Posted by arpeti on Tuesday, 12.1.09 @ 19:24pm


Warren Zevon isn't in the Hall of Fame...

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 12.1.09 @ 19:31pm


Arpeti, I agree with you that Linda Ronstadt should definitely be inducted. But actually Warren Zevon has NOT been inducted. Also this query has been going on for a little more than three years, considering she's been eligible for 20!

Posted by Jonny on Tuesday, 12.1.09 @ 19:40pm


Linda Ronstandt deserves to be in. This nominating group is worthless. So many great people should be considered, but they leave people out who Jann Wenner hates. That's real mature!

Posted by dee on Saturday, 12.19.09 @ 17:39pm


That the most successful and versitile Female Singer in Rock History is not in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and ABBA is is a stain on Hall. Period!
What's next, Yes or jethro Tull who have a combined carreer of some 80 years and counting? This seems likely and why i consider the whole process a Sham. I guess that's why it is located in Cleveland!

Posted by Bill on Wednesday, 01.6.10 @ 16:11pm


Linda Ronstadt doesn't need the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame to validate her career or influence in the world of music. She probably could care less about induction. How do we know she hasn't turned it down already? And to think that a few well connected people acting as judges can decide who is and isn't worthy is preposterous. It is all about a little self-important club that decides nothing except who gets in their doors. They don't speak for Rock and Roll and they don't speak for music herstory.

Posted by rob tempe arizona on Thursday, 02.4.10 @ 19:55pm


This case is just a classic vendetta against an artist who deserves but does not need the R&RHOF,probably Jessica Simpson, The Jonas Bros are gonna make it before Linda Ronstandt. She is already way beyond any Hall of Fame. Thank you Linda for ALL you beautiful music.

Posted by stansfield on Wednesday, 02.24.10 @ 04:02am


Linda's playing SunCity in South Africa at the height of aparheid when Mandela and the world were calling for a cultural boycott is the stain on her career. Her recent attacks on Republicans with this shameful act in her closet is almost laughable if it was not so pathetic and sad. She was the top female recording artist in the world. She could have helped make a difference instead of lining her pockets with radical, racist money.

Posted by skytorch on Tuesday, 03.2.10 @ 20:32pm


didn't stain nothin.. Good music of love an truth is for everyone even you!
It will free your soul if you open your eyes!
She is a lady to this day

Posted by mrxyz on Tuesday, 03.2.10 @ 20:43pm


Linda Ronstadt is a tremendous gift to the human music experience. Her voice can be heard in 120 albums around the world, her influence is grand and her nuances are subtle.

No offense, but what is the rock n roll hall of fame but a bunch of baby boomer males/men - who benefited from their parents aparthied and now think they are the saviors and exploiters, uh, I mean exposers of people they still want to control.

Linda Ronstadt is antithetical to what these men want a like. They can control Madonna, they'll throw crumbs to other women, they will use Donna Summers against Ronstadt, and when they start to lose cred, they'll nominate a person of color or woman. Same old male Anglo bs. They should move to England.

Posted by DaleShackelford on Friday, 03.12.10 @ 01:56am


It is an insult that this lady has not been placed in the Hall of Fame.From rock to Spanish folk she has continued to dazzel the world!

Posted by L-7 on Wednesday, 03.24.10 @ 11:46am


Linda is a legend... an amazing person... an amazing example of humanity... With no malice intended, I am truly saddened by her weight gain. This opinion doesn't take away from her magical music, but for there to be such a drastic change from the way she used to physically present herself to the world, I don't feel drawn to her the way I used to, and I think that's unfortunate. We live in a society where you just don't see women of Linda's girth on magazine covers, as newscasters, as up-and-coming musicians. The majority of our society requests a physically appealing exterior. It's not wrong to have that opinion. It's not wrong to state that opinion, any more than it's wrong to state a political preference or a religious preference. I just know from my standpoint that I would not be drawn to see Linda in concert the way she looks like now, and I wouldn't be drawn to buying any CDs for the same reason. How we physically present ourselves to the world is very important in today's society, whether we like it or not. I want my Linda back! Linda, please, please, proclaim your intent on getting back to the physically beautiful you! Reclaim who you were! Come back PLEASE!!!!!

Posted by Harry K. on Sunday, 03.28.10 @ 12:34pm


You people act like an Aretha Franklin,Janis Joplin,Tina Turner,Ronnie Spector,or Whitney Houston has been denied the Hall.These women were true one of a kind voices in their prime,Linda was not on that level.Linda lacks their number of classics because she sang too many that already were.I love seeing her given credit for digging out old songs and being the 70's Pat Boone.RS did not even bother including her on it's list of 100 greatest singers.Don't worry,the HOF will eventually let her in,they are running out of people.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Wednesday, 04.14.10 @ 19:52pm


@RR HOF, on your comments pertaining to Linda Ronstadt, the complete fallacy in your analysis and misunderstanding of history and relevance, etc, etc.

1st) " Aretha Franklin,Janis Joplin,Tina Turner,Ronnie Spector,or Whitney Houston"

Janis Joplin died young, had a hit song she did not write and sold very little albums. I saw her in concert at Red Rock and her voices was not the best but she had presence. Janis Joplin death prolonged her career and the fact that many men like their female stars dead pretty much cemented her reputation; Tina Turner, has been inducted as part of a group and defined the red hot momma routine, a talent; Ronnie Spector, although talented really was part of a female group with a few hits that were not written by her; Whitney Houston is not even inducted in RRHOF, but I guess since Madonna is why not her; As for Aretha Franklin a true talent and a voice from god whom I'd gladly put Linda alongside.

2)"Linda lacks their number of classics because she sang too many that already were"

Many of the songs that Linda made famous were not all classics in fact many of them were obscure, or had not reached the popularity. But more importantly, Linda sang songs written by men, sung by men, and turned them into a woman's song with a woman's bent.
Another thing is that Linda Ronstadt was an ALBUMS seller in addition to a singles seller. A first for a female artist at any time.
Another thing is that Linda Ronstadt was a Major Concert stadiums artists a first for a female artist at any time.

You couple all of this and it is laughable to consider her the 70's Pat Boone. It just shows your like of depth and knowledge of what this woman, Linda Ronstadt, did to the music industry as a female SOLO ARTIST and her 4 decade long reputation as a consummate voice in the music industry.

Whether Linda Ronstadt is in the RRHOF or not IS NOT GOING TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE FACT that: she was the highest paid woman in rock; the first female arena class diva; the most popular selling female artist of all time, at the time, has recorded over
30 solo albums, is respected enough to be on other artist albums, over 100 albums, and counting; is considered a Rock and Pop and Music pioneer, has 11 Grammy's, Has sold 10 of millions of albums worldwide and has success in all fields of music all. This is something that Pat Boone, Johnny Rivers or any man never achieved in their dreams, a success that Janis Joplin never got to live to see, a career Ronnie Spector could only wish, and four decades into a career, Linda Ronstadt shouldn't be compared to anyone, she is simply unique and well off. Thank you very much.

Posted by The House Doctor on Thursday, 04.15.10 @ 14:41pm


"RRHOF judge" you can't be serious?? Janis Joplin, Tina Turner, Ronnie Spector?? Pat Boone??? As The House Doctor implied, you really have a lot to learn about music and it would be a really good idea for you to *explore* Ronstadt's career before you issue such remarks. What planet were you on in the 1970s?

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 04.17.10 @ 05:06am


And "RRHOF Judge"....TWO of her albums are in Rolling Stone's list of the best albums of all time. So get with it.

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 04.17.10 @ 05:09am


These attempts to downplay the impact of the singers I named will not fly. Janis Joplin: Incredible impact on late 60's early 70"s rock singers and all those that followed. After Joplin arrived on the scene suddenly Roger Daltrey dropped the tender and affected interpretations he had shown in "the who sell out",and "Tommy" and was singing in a full roar.Her impact on the young newcomer Robert Plant is clear also. What have most heavy metal/hard rock singers been doing for over 40 years other than being male Janis Joplins? She was not singing metal or hard rock herself,but the influence is still there.Yes she burned brief,but oh so bright. Ronnie Spector: She represents a musical style and chapter in Rock and Roll history that the HOF could not ignore.To ignore the Spector chapter is like trying to ignore the late 70's punk chapter. Tina Turner: A voice much more distinctive that Lindas and possessing about 1000 times the stage presence. Whitney Houston: Not your cup of tea,fine.Truthfully not mine also. But I at least can stay impartial and recognise her range and a power that in her prime even rivaled Aretha.Her rendition of The Star Spangled Banner to open Super Bowl 25 on Jan 27th,1991,is to this day the only such performance to be a top 20 billboard single,considered one of American TV's most memorable moments and the standard by which all singers of the national anthem have been measured to this day. Her list of number 1 and top 10 albums/singles is impressive,as is her total album/single sales.Also linda would trade the broadway shows for Whitneys two successful motion pictures in a heartbeat. Some here insist that Lindas cover songs were brilliant fresh interpretations.Here are examples to illustrate what it is to actually do that.Search You Tube for " Battle of Evermore - Ann & Nancy Wilson " " Fiona Apple Across The Universe " and ""Whitney Houston I will always love you " This quote was priceless "" Many of the songs that Linda made famous were not all classics in fact many of them were obscure, or had not reached the popularity"" Very carefull way of putting it,but the people within the HOF see clearly that like Pat Boone before her,Linda reaped the benefits of an American listening public that would not recognise the musical ideas of African Americans and had total ignorance of their work in most cases. Using such album filler was not just for a few early albums like the Beatles and Stones,but continued all the way to her last mainstream rock album,"get closer" in 1982.Imagine John and Paul or Mick and Keith saying years after the debut albums,""Naw, this Day in the life or this paint it black song is too experimental,lets just stick in a Little Richard or Chuck Berry cover like in 1964!!"" Sorry everybody,but if you want to hear heatwave or back in the USA, listen to the real deal.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Monday, 04.19.10 @ 00:39am


To RRHOF Judge, regarding your comments on Linda Ronstadt.

The only ones that reaped the benefits of an American listening public that would not recognise the musical ideas of African Americans and had total ignorance of their work in most cases is in most cases Everyone NON African American IN THE HALL OF FAME.

The ones in the hall of fame have been THE EXPLOITERS. And the prime example is the way RRHOF judge uses African Americans in his/her arguments against the white bread Pat Boone. This is such an OLD argument and it is an argument that has worked for most of the White Artists who are now in the hall of fame. They continue this old game so that they could go on fooling the public, look like they were helping African American artist, this sir is exploitation.

If you say some people the HOF see clearly Ronstadt as the Pat Boone before her are clearly people that are projecting their own denial

And don't be sorry, Linda Ronstadt is the real deal and you should not have to think she is the real deal without taking away from other artist, but of of course for people like you it has to be all or nothing and a different standard.

An it is annoying when White males uses a female like Ronstadt against African Americans, and who do they play these two groups against?, one of their own - Pat Boone.

What a patterned method of exploitation that has allowed you to get a way with crap for generations.

What the hall of fame seems to have become in the last 30 years is a corporatocracy. Plain and simple, and What have most heavy metal/hard rock singers been doing for over 25 years is really patterned, corporate rock. They are the definition of cover artist because they've covered and smoothered true art and music for the last 25 years. And who cares at this point whether or not they write their own crappy tunes.

In closing, there are many artist I like to hear, whether they wrote the song, were the original artist or had the biggest hit with it. The issue is how they impacted generations, not sit here, like you - defaming and discrediting the American public as stupid - while reaping the benefits of the American public, including African Americans.

Posted by Night Caller on Tuesday, 04.20.10 @ 03:27am


Linda not in the hall of fame currently means she did not reap the benefits? Her bank account says otherwise.What separates others such Page/Plant from Linda is that after the first two albums lifting hooks and riffs from R&B artists,they like the Beatles and Stones,found their own sound and altered the course of Rock and Roll.""impacted generations"?? In recent years this is what I see,I see The Dixie Chicks performing "Landslide" by Stevie Nicks,sometimes onstage with her.I see Gretchen Wilson, Fergy and one American Idol contestant after another wanting to take a swing at Ann Wilsons super challenging "Baracuda".What song first sung by Linda does a contemporary singer care about?

Posted by RR HOF judge on Tuesday, 04.20.10 @ 10:00am


All I am saying is that their are better examples of people not in the HOF.Speaking of Ann Wilson,why is Heart(orig lineup) not in? Ann and Nancy have great songwriting skills and Anns 5 octave range in her prime was just not human!Watch live 70's performances on youtube!

Posted by RR HOF judge on Tuesday, 04.20.10 @ 10:12am


"" Linda's playing SunCity in South Africa at the height of aparheid when Mandela and the world were calling for a cultural boycott is the stain on her career "" No artist including Linda should have gone,but I hope that is really not part of the reason for her not being inducted.After all,other artists now in the hall of fame such as the Ojays performed in Sun City during apartheid.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Tuesday, 04.20.10 @ 11:51am


"What song first sung by Linda does a contemporary singer care about?"

Sarah Brightman (and SHE is someone who can actually SING, RRHOF) covered "Winter Light," cowritten by Linda. Trisha Yearwood covered "Try Me Again," cowritten by Linda. Van Halen and others covered "You're No Good," after Linda made popular an absolutely obscure song. Crystal Gayle covered "Faithless Love" 16 years later. Etc., etc.

If you enjoy Tina Turner and Ann Wilson better, it may be that you prefer screaming to singing. There is a difference.

Fiona Apple's "ATU" is probably the tackiest cover ever, by anyone. I fully agree, however, on the Whitney Houston issues.

Posted by Ruy on Tuesday, 04.20.10 @ 23:09pm


We seem to have a different idea of what contemporary is.My two examples happened within the last 5 years.To my why not in the hall list I also place Carly Simon,it's crazy that she is not in.If Fionas ATU cover is not your thing,I happily substitute Ike and Tina Turners cover of "Proud Mary",or something lesser known but worth checking out,The Sundays cover of "wild horses" We in rock and roll prefer to refer to screaming as "lead vocalist".My music teacher would never approve,but thats rock and roll.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Wednesday, 04.21.10 @ 00:56am


Carly Simon is undoubtedly a gifted musician but she was a studio artist; she should never be inducted.
The Sarah Brightman reference is from 2001 and the Trisha Yearwood from 2000, that's contemporary enough for me. As for You're No Good, Ellie Campbell's is from 2001 and Wilson Phillips' is from 2004.
I think your music teacher is really cool :D

Posted by Ruy on Friday, 04.23.10 @ 00:07am


Not to mention the fact that NONE of the covers you've mentioned from the beginning fit your own idea of contemporary.

Posted by Ruy on Friday, 04.23.10 @ 00:10am


Aha....I found the two examples you meant, sorry. I missed them the first time around due to their sheer insignificance.
I must say "you in rock and roll" are very, very wise people. Such a convenient term, "lead vocalist"...it doesn't even imply singing. That allows us to agree on something else - the Wilson sisters are terrific vocalists. I own many of the records that Heart released.
It occurs to me you should listen to a Ronstadt album. You seem to be one of those who think they know her from the singles, the hits, but that isn't what her career has been about nor what built up "her bank account," as you put it.



Posted by Ruy on Wednesday, 04.28.10 @ 01:13am


ROH Judge. I hope you are not an actual judge because you are obviously very biased against Linda. As far as Linda not being on RS list of greatest 100 singers. Why would this surprise anyone? The people who control RS are the same ones at the RRHOF. And as far as Whitney in her prime "having power/range to rival Aretha", have you actually heard Ronstadt live? I doubt it. Anyone who heard Ronstadt live in her prime would not make that comparison. Linda in her prime (even into her early 50s) actually out powers both Houston and Franklin (I don't think this is debatable) although few give her credit for this. Yes, Whitney's Star Spangled version is great but it is well known that she was backed by a previously made studio recording. Not to take anything away from Whitney; she is awesome, but Ronstadt's singing style is much different and although she doesn't always shoot for the rafters as Whitney does, it's not because she is not capable of it. By the way, as far as your question about songs first recorded by Ronstadt that anyone else covered. Uh, well do some reasearch. Whitney actually was inspired to sing "I Will Always Love You" by Ronstadt's 1975 version.

Posted by Joe on Wednesday, 05.19.10 @ 11:52am


"What song first sung by Linda does a contemporary singer care about?"

Hmmmmm.

Different Drum. Redone by Suzanna Hoffs
You're No Good. Redone by Van Halen
Long, Long Time. Redone by Mindy McCready
I Will Always Love You. Ok, not ORIGINALLY done by Linda since Dolly Parton wrote it. but I have read that Whitney Houston learned of and was inspired by Linda's 1975 version.

Posted by Joe on Wednesday, 05.19.10 @ 22:16pm


"What song first sung by Linda does a contemporary singer care about?"

You're implication being, she is not influential, I guess.

Well maybe you could check with the industry people, recording artists, song writers and others who voted her #21 on Vh1's list of 100 greatest women in rock.

Posted by Joe on Thursday, 05.20.10 @ 22:29pm


Joe: Yep, maybe he could. The RIAA might have this to say:

-In her prime, Ronstadt was the 2nd best-selling female artist of all time, after Barbra Streisand. (That automatically makes her the top-selling female rock artist).

-Even now, 30+ years later, she is still one of the top 10 best-selling female vocalists of all time, nestled between Britney Spears and Janet Jackson. She is also still the top-selling female rock artist of all time, unless you consider Madonna a rock artist (in that case, Ronstadt would be second).

Posted by Ruy on Saturday, 05.22.10 @ 18:08pm


Rock 'n' Roll started with the HEART in between it sort of became superficial but LINDA RONSTADT is about the HEART.

Posted by Tony Mark on Tuesday, 05.25.10 @ 21:53pm


A travesty. Linda can sing the balls off of a bull, the paint off of a barn, and the stars out of the sky. Come to think of it, the RNR Hall of Fame is a bit too confining for her and really doesn't begin to explain what she has accomplished.

Posted by Beltway Greg on Wednesday, 06.2.10 @ 22:01pm


I have already voted but for you that have not..! You may want to think about her unless she is already in LOL

Posted by mrxyzomg on Friday, 07.23.10 @ 19:32pm


EIP Kenny Edwards

Posted by Aaron O'Donnell on Friday, 08.20.10 @ 08:40am


In my opinion, the only female peer of Linda's in the Hall is Joni Mitchell, who while a magnificent singer-songwiiter, was out-gifted by Linda. Indeed, Linda's career was a clinic on how to sing country, country rock, rock, Motown, and ... did I miss anything? She was the best in all of those rock-related genres. Just one of her recordings, namely Blue Bayou, should have qualified her for the Hall, that's how good it was. But, as others have pointed out, there was so much more.

Posted by kemporiole on Monday, 09.13.10 @ 21:19pm


Linda Ronstadt has arguably one of the top 3 voices in the history of Rock music and hers is easily the most beautiful. I think the Rock purists from the Hall of Fame resent her because she went on to record a string of non-rock albums and don't feel she belongs -- which is patently ridiculous.

If you listen to country music from the 70s and to it now and you listen to her music from the 70s you realize that she basically invented country music as it stands at the moment.

She was a complete pioneer and she was the only woman up until that time to achieve that level of success as a solo act. People waited for albums to be released by supergroups and Linda during her rock peak. She is a victim of her own popularity. Critics love to hate artists the people love and many times they are correct but not in this case. Her voice is the most thrilling voice in music history with the possible exception of Aretha Franklin. Her non-induction truly embarrasses the Hall of Fame.

Posted by Jonathan on Wednesday, 09.15.10 @ 14:15pm


You can't compare Linda Ronstadt to Carly Simon, let alone Joni Mitchell. Those are singer-songwriters. Ronstadt is just a singer. So she might have a great voice. Big deal. So does Susan Boyle. That doesn't make you Rock & Roll immediately. Sorry, but sleeping with rock stars and singing their songs doesn't automatically qualify you for an institution that's primarily supposed to represent a state of mind that goes against the establishment and not with it. If it was just for vocal abilities, we might as well induct Anna Netrebko. If it was just for record sales, we might as well induct Mannheim Steamroller or Yanni.

Posted by (you know who) on Sunday, 09.26.10 @ 17:04pm


Exactly. Linda Rondstadt's biggest problem is the fact that she is just a singer and has never written anything. Sure, she was selling out arenas, but so were Three Dog Night and Joe Cocker and, unfortunately, they aren't in either because they didn't write their own material. Also, another hurdle for her is the fact that while she has a great voice she is not recognized as a passionate one. She pretty much sings songs by wrote and doesn't bother to put her own spin on them. And finally, Miss Rondstadt doesn't really sing rock anymore. Last I heard she was concentrating more on mariachi music. Maybe if she stuck with rock it would have been easier for her to get in.

Posted by Brian on Sunday, 10.17.10 @ 03:54am


In April I gave The Dixie Chicks singing Landslide,Gretchen Wilson,and Fergy singing Baracuda as examples of contempory artists performing songs from other 70's artists and posed the question "What song first sung by Linda does a contemporary singer care about?" I get replys with artists that go back almost as far as Linda herself or examples of covers that are from years earlier than mine.
Some are songs that are far from being well known by most while my two examples are staples of FM classic rock radio.Someone even have tried to slip "your're no good" past me hoping I am clueless and don't know that soul song was sung twice before her,and then worse,marginalised the original artists and listeners of Soul music,calling that genre obscurity. Not quite what I was looking for.

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Monday, 11.1.10 @ 00:52am


Just to add to you Brian,in april this year I listed Ann & Nancy Wilsons cover of "The Battle of Evermore"- Fiona Apples cover of "Across The Universe" Whitney Houston cover of "I will always love you" Ike and Tina Turners cover of "Proud Mary" and The Sundays cover of "wild horses" as examples of artists who re-imagine a song,not just cover it.I could name here"summertime blues" from Who Live at leeds also.And lawsuits aside,Led Zepplins covers of "dazed and confused" and "babe Im gunna leave you"are brilliant.Lindas only song that these people can produce as comparable I guess is "blue bayou".

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Monday, 11.1.10 @ 01:12am


Referring to Linda Ronstadt record or album sales please note that wikipedia is often wrong on many things.
One example for the faultiness of wikipedia is the often-cited information, that Linda sold 70 million albums worldwide.

In fact, Linda Ronstadt sold more than 100 million albums worldwide.

Linda Ronstadt albums were listed 13 times at #1 in international album charts.
Linda Ronstadt singles reached 13 times #1 in international single charts.
Linda Ronstadt received...
... 10 Grammy Awards,
...the Special Decade Award in 1979 as the female singer of the decade.
...3 American Music Awards

In 2008 she received the Alma Trailblazer Award (that night she also received the confirmation, that she ist the biggest selling latino recording artist in music history).

these are only few reasons why Linda Ronstadt deserves to be in the Rock Hall Of Fame.

A final word to wikipedia informations.
What many don’t know is that Wikipedia also has a darker side that is not well known to the average user.

There´s a darker side of Wikipedia that stems from the fact that the information provided comes from an open group of contributors, resulting in unreliable data lacking proper sources.


Many teachers today prohibit students from using Wikipedia as a source in reports and research due to the anonymity and possibility for unconfirmed (or even falsified) information.






Posted by Zach. on Wednesday, 11.3.10 @ 07:49am


I wish you had not cautioned people to avoid using Wikipedia based replys,those are the most entertaining.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Tuesday, 11.9.10 @ 19:23pm


Somehow I stumbled onto the fact that Linda Ronstadt hasn't been honored with induction into the R&R HOF. It is preposterous ....a terrible injustice. Hopefully, the voters ...whoever they are ...will do the right thing and honor one of the truly great voices of all time.

Posted by walt on Monday, 12.6.10 @ 19:34pm


Linda Ronstadt may not have written her own songs like Carly Simon or Joni Mitchell. But none of their songs ever affected me the way her songs did. Their songs sounded good at the time but I don't really listen to them anymore. While I still enjoy Linda's work. How many times can one listen to "You're So Vain"? Linda RULED the seventies and put together the Eagles as her touring band. Her omission from the RRHOF diminishes it and not her. I feel that the RRHOF is a joke.

Posted by LR fan on Monday, 01.3.11 @ 19:29pm


It's not about you personally being affected,it's about this.If I name for a person knowledgable about the past 40 years of popular music the songs "big yellow taxi","help me",or "Free Man in Paris"(feel free to substitute Carly with "That's the Way I've Always Heard It Should Be","You're So Vain","Nobody Does It Better",and "Let the River Run"),they will answer Joni Mitchell without hesitation because these and other songs are part of her legacy only, forever identified with her and her only.Lindas legacy suffers from the fact that she shares her well known songs with earlier artists.She introduced almost no original songs in her long R&R chapter 1969-1983.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Sunday, 01.16.11 @ 01:23am


To: RR HOF Judge.
So your point is that none of Linda's covers have endured in the public realm. Hmmmm. Not go back and apply that same standard to the current list of inductees and when you see that it is not a relavant criteria, come up with another reason to exclude her. Wanda Jackson had what enduring classic? Before Bonnie Raitt was inducted in 2000, except for her success the prior year, had anyone in the general public ever heard of her? Yes, she sings beautifully, plays guitar etc, but there was not a single song that you would immediately associate her with. If you want to start naming album cuts, let's go. Linda's stand tall against Bonnie's anyday. But that's not the point. The R&RHOF has proved itself to be nothing more than a glorified bunch of groupies who induct who they want to and modify the criteria to suit their preferences. All of these singers have cited Linda as a strong influence: Pat Benatar, Sheryl Crowe, Tricia Yearwood, Catlin Rose, Patty Loveless, Tia Carerre, Ben Harper, Eva Cassidy (RIP), Wynonna Judd, Roseanne Cash, Martina McBride, Susanna Hoffs, I could go on. Based on that, she should be considered at least as an early influence. If you are really a RR HOF Judge and you and your committee want to be taken seriously, you need to come up with hardfast criteria which includes all that is a basis for your entire list of inductees. By the way, have you heard both Mike Nesmith's original and Linda's version of Diffenent Drum? Have you heard Warren Zevon's version of Poor Poor Pitiful Me and Linda's remake? Or Gary Whit'e Long, Long Time and Linda's take? I would classify these as a strong reinventions. Personally, I prefer her version Chuck Berry's Back In The USA but that might sound like sacrilege to you.

Posted by Rich on Wednesday, 01.26.11 @ 10:16am


On my previous post, Change the first work of the third sentence from "Not" to "Now". Thanks.

Posted by Rich on Thursday, 01.27.11 @ 12:43pm


On my previous post, Change the first work of the third sentence from "Not" to "Now". Thanks.

Posted by Rich on Thursday, 01.27.11 @ 12:43pm


Please join the petition to induct Linda Ronstadt into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame by singing at the following location:
http://lindaronstadt.eu/petition.htm
Thanks.

Posted by Rich on Tuesday, 02.1.11 @ 13:52pm


LOL Sorry, that would be "by signing, not by singing".

Posted by Rich on Tuesday, 02.1.11 @ 15:25pm


c"mon folks, no one lady has ever been more deserving of our accolades than Linda. can we honour her properly in her life or must she be gone before she gets the respect she deserves... linda is as great today as she ever was, thank you, xo, tf

Posted by elvis cash on Sunday, 03.27.11 @ 11:44am


My God, throw a homecoming party bigger than the prodigal sons and induct Linda Ronstadt into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Take a quick YouTube tour and you have to see that her artistry elevates every song she sings. And look at her record sales and calculate the millions of fans she brought to rock. Dispel suspicion and gain respect by nominating and inducting Linda Ronstadt into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame!

Posted by Bart McNeil on Sunday, 04.3.11 @ 06:04am


Linda Ronstadt is nothing more than a woman with pipes. The majority of her song book are covers of real artists. She takes these more established songs and butchers and renders them meaningless and boring. Sure she has a great voice. But she's not a true artist. She doesn't create she only copies. She is a millionairess who supports apartheid and exploits the mexican american community by butchering their culture's songs as well. She does not belong in the rock and roll hall of fame.

Posted by JAY on Wednesday, 04.20.11 @ 15:26pm


But Jay,did you not see the earlier comments where some artists called her an influence? I hope that means we can can find examples of people filling half or more of their CD's with 10, 20, and 30 year old material.I also look forward to artists being influenced to proclaim that rock music is meaningless fluff and leaving the genre entirely.Linda made this papal decree in 1983,the year of Syncronicity by The Police,Combat Rock by The Clash,War by U2, Murmur by R.E.M.,The Final Cut by Pink Floyd,,Power, Corruption & Lies by New Order,More Fun In The New World by X,and Texas Flood by Stevie Ray Vaughan.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Thursday, 04.21.11 @ 01:30am


Also, yes not preferring Chuck Berry's Back In The USA does sound like sacrilege. Berrys original represented the cutting edge of music at that time.For Linda to rehash that in 1978 is a case study in why her legacy suffers.Lets remind ourselves that 1978 was the year we were introduced to Roxanne by The Police,Just What I Needed and Bye Bye Love by The Cars,Who Are You by The Who, One Way or Another by Blondie,I Wanna Be Sedated by The Ramones,We've Got Tonite by Bob Seger, Werewolves Of London by Warren Zevon,Take Me To the River by Talking Heads,Beast of Burden by The Rolling Stones,a punked out version of I Fought the Law by The Clash, Radio Radio by Elvis Costello,and Badlands by Bruce Springsteen.Maybe if Linda had approached Bruce to introduced us that year to "because the night" instead of Patty Smith she would be seen by the hall as more than a great voice selling records.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Thursday, 04.21.11 @ 02:41am


So ROH Judge, keep talking. You are succeeding at proving my point. Which is, you don't have one. Keeping changing your reason for Linda's exclusion. First she is not influential. Now that we've established she has been an influence to many, they must also endorse her personal views. To use your own words, you are a case study in blind subjectivity. Keep yapping fool.

Posted by Rich on Thursday, 04.28.11 @ 15:48pm


Linda Ronstadt SHOULD be in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame...end of story!

Posted by Joe C. on Tuesday, 05.10.11 @ 11:54am


And JAY, is obviously another objective observer. If you actually had a grasp of facts, you would know that Linda does not "support apartheid". She may have made a bad decision by performing in Sun City, South Africa during apartheid but she clearly does not support the policy and never did. So your comment is b.s. and hateful. Furthermore, she is part of the Mexican American community and allowed to sing and record anything she wants despite a-holes like you.

Posted by Rich on Wednesday, 05.11.11 @ 18:07pm


Linda not only has the pipes, she has the diction, the tempo, the style, that sets her apart from all other female rock vocalists.

She never screamed or waivered her voice. She is an icon, and it is a damn shame that the RnR Hall of Fame continues to overlook this great talent.

Maybe in 2013, I sure hope so.

Posted by cryin shame on Wednesday, 06.1.11 @ 14:09pm


I find it absolutely mind boggling that Linda Ronstadt is not in the R & R Hall of Fame. Lady Gaga's meat dress is but Linda and her 40 plus years of work is not. Given here career and range of musical talents she should have been a founding member. Words can not express my dismay.

Posted by webjefe on Friday, 07.22.11 @ 19:29pm


The RnR HoF is a joke, people!! Besides,I doubt someone as classy and as smart as Linda Ronstadt would give a big old bear poop to be inducted into this obvious sham.

Posted by Adrian on Saturday, 07.30.11 @ 20:04pm


The R&RHF has to make distinctions. Selling albums is not the only criteria. You have to look at artistry, influence, the effect on music.

Fact is that Ronstadt did not write any songs. And before we get the stock reply "But Elvis didn't either", Elvis was (a) a pioneer centrally involved in the very origins of rock music, and (b) much more successful. Not writing your own material isn't an automatic disqualification, but Ronstadt would have a much better case if she had been involved in the musical composition of her albums. In that sense even Donna Summer has an advantage over her.

On top of that, her music was MOR (middle of the road). There is a reason she achieved success in a bland musical period in mainstream music like the mid-70s. And the image she projected was not eaxctly very forward looking. Her signature album talked about having her heart used like a wheel. What image was she portraying, the more assertive female image that came into vogue in the late 70s and continues strong in music to this day, or the traditional passive image of women in music before that point? In retrospect, mainstream success in the mid 70s meant too many compromises both artistically and in terms of the image she willingly portrayed, an image that quickly became behind the times.

Beyond that, it what way was her music (overlooking that she never wrote any) innovative or influential? Middle of the road by definition means the absence of anything original or innovative.

Finally, what influence has she had? To be blunt she really didn't influence anyone. What major artist cites Ronstadt.

In sum, I don't see it. She was a good performer and had a success career. But that's about it.





Posted by astrodog on Monday, 08.8.11 @ 01:00am


Hey astrodog. You're an idiot that has no idea what the hell you are talking about. Do your homework before you show your stupidity. Try your sexist comments on someone else. It doesn't work on Linda Ronstadt who was not only The First Lady of Rock but one of the many queens of Rock over time. What are you? A twelve year old?

Posted by Rob on Monday, 08.29.11 @ 01:40am


Actually, astrodog made a lot of well thought out and fact driven points. He did his homework and there was nothing sexist about anything he said. There no reason to go after him/her personally when you didn't even bother to address the points he made.

Posted by Gassman on Monday, 08.29.11 @ 02:41am


@ Astrodog - "Fact is that Ronstadt did not write any songs. And before we get the stock reply "But Elvis didn't either", Elvis was (a) a pioneer centrally involved in the very origins of rock music, and (b) much more successful."

Going by that logic, Brenda Lee, Wanda Jackson, and Darlene Love should never have been inducted. And what about Scotty Moore? Or Ritchie Valens - who is famous for two and only two songs, one of which he didn't write, but merely sang differently? No offense to Moore or Valens, but do you really think their "influence" in the music world was greater than or even equal to Ronstadt's? Brenda Lee is a perfect example of why Ronstadt belongs in the HOF - Brenda didn't write her songs either, but like Linda, what set her apart from the crowd was her uncommon ability to interpret songs in a way that had mass appeal. When you say "Ronstadt would have a much better case if she had been involved in the musical composition of her albums", you completely ignore the fact that from "Heart Like A Wheel" on, Linda was instrumental in creating, along with Peter Asher, all of her albums, starting with choice of material. If Linda Ronstadt is nothing else, she is unmatched in her uncanny ability to choose just the right songs to sing and put on her albums, and to interpret them in a way that won her not only universal acclaim and numerous awards, but sold millions of records and sold out stadiums all over the world for years. To argue that Linda Ronstadt's career is in any way less deserving than any of those unquestionably deserving artists listed above is ludicrous in the extreme, and makes clear your woeful misunderstanding of the criteria for admission into the Rock&Roll Hall Of Fame.

Posted by Dick on Monday, 08.29.11 @ 09:18am


I love it. I point out a simple, indisputable fact that she didn't write any of her songs, which, while certinly not conclusive, is a factor, and you come back with "but she choose the material" and that she allegedly had "the uncanny ability to interpret the songs to achieve mass appeal". Translation: She was a good singer who sang conventional, uninnovative, middle of the road material and became popular as a result. I couldn't care less who was inducted previously; the Hall has a strange history and earlier inductions are inconsistent. For my money a performer who was completely conventional and very short on innovation who also did not write her own material does not belong even though she was popular.
For example, let's look at Heart Like a Wheel, her high water mark. Her No. 1 "Your No Good" is a cover that first charted in 1963. The next hit, "I Can't Help It (If I'm Still in Love With You", was a Hank Williams song. The next "When Will I Be Loved" is an Everley Brothers song. The "Dark End of the Street" was a James Carr song. And so on. To cut this short, there are covers all over her albums which are some of her biggest hits.
Now let's quote the Hall's own criteria: "That said, candidates are reviewed and discussed relative to their impact on this music that we broadly call rock and roll. The innovation and influence of these artists is also critical. Gold records, number one hits, and million sellers are really not appropriate standards for evaluation."

I do sympathize because some of the older inductions may not always fit that criteria. But all kudos aside for the claim that Ronstadt supposedly had some groundbreaking ability to reinterpret old songs (she was an attractive singer with an excellent voice=popularity), I respectfully cannot agree. And it doesn't look like the RORHF will eiher anytime soon.

Posted by astrodog on Monday, 08.29.11 @ 11:11am


I love it. Astrodog continues to fabricate lies and then act like a victim in order to rationalize his faulty argument with statements like:
1)“ I couldn't care less who was inducted previously; the Hall has a strange history and earlier inductions are inconsistent.”
SORRY, NOT A VALID ARGUMENT BY YOU OR THE HALL. NO DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE ACCEPTABLE ESPECIALLY BY AN ORGANIZATION FUNDED IN PART BY THE TAXPAYERS.

2) “I love it. I point out a simple, indisputable fact that she didn't write any of her songs.”
WRONG: Fact is Linda wrote or co-wrote at least three songs that she has recorded: Winter Light (featured in the movie The Secret Garden), Try Me Again and Lo Siento Mi Vida (both from Hasten Down The Wind). Look it up! (again, do your GD homework)

I COULD STOP RIGHT HERE AND HAVE HAD PROVED MY POINT BUT I THINK I WILL CONTINUE.

Your remark about “You’re No Good” having charted before in 1963 is more snarkiness on your part but unlike the artist you allude to Linda took it into the Billboard Top 40 and then all the way to #1. (no small fete) You act like recording a cover of a song is some sort of crime or an “easy” hit which it isn’t. Just look at the statistics on the lack of success artists have had in getting covers charted.

3) “and you come back with "but she choose the material" and that she allegedly had "the uncanny ability to interpret the songs to achieve mass appeal". Translation: She was a good singer who sang conventional, uninnovative, middle of the road material and became popular as a result.”

FROM MARTINA McBRIDE: Linda’s voice is so pure and so beautiful; and I think that, even though she can sing anything, it wasn’t about showing off, it was about ‘How can I interpret this song, and in the best light?’” “One of the things that I think is great about Linda is her ability to take other people’s songs and really make them her own— for instance, a song like ‘Blue Bayou’.”

4) what influence has she had? To be blunt she really didn't influence anyone. What major artist cites Ronstadt?

There are NO shortage of artists she has inspired and influenced among them Roseanne Cash, Trisha Yearwood, Eagles, Patti Loveless, Sam Bush, Wynonna, Ben Harper, Fergie, Tia Carrere, Shania Twain, Pat Benatar (to name a few) and several songwriters have even been inspired to write songs about her among them Paul Simon, Hoyt Axton, Paul Davis, JD Souther,etc.

AND JUST FOR THE RECORD (because you’ve made such a deal about covers):

Linda’s first single Different Drum was its first charted version in the BILLBOARD HOT 100 Singles in 1967.
Linda’s second single Long Long Time was its first chartered version in the BILLBOARD HOT 100 Singles in 1970.
Other first charted Ronstadt Top 100 singles songs were The Long Way Around, Up To My Neck, Love Has No Pride, Love Is A Rose, Poor Poor Pitiful Me, How Do I Make You, Get Closer, Sometimes You Just Can’t Win, Lose Again, Easy For You To Say, Someone To Lay Down Beside Me, Somewhere Out There, All My Life, Dreams To Dream, Adios, etc. She has had numerous first charted hits on the Country Charts as well not to mention first charted duet hits. She was also a very successful albums artist. (even more so than singles)

Rolling Stone Magazine writes, a whole generation "but for her, might never have heard the work of Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, or Elvis Costello." And I will add that her excellent recordings from the Great American Songbook and her #1 all time best selling non-English language album in history (of Mariachi music) has rescued two genres of fine music and made them popular again.

And by the way, although this is not in the Hall’s criteria for inclusion NO other singer, not even Elvis has recorded successfully in as many genres as has Linda Ronstadt. This I fear is her reason for exclusion. Had she died in 1980 she would have been inducted as soon as she was eligible. That is the hypocrisy of the Hall of Fame.

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Monday, 08.29.11 @ 20:57pm


Actually, astrodog made a lot of well thought out and fact driven points. He did his homework and there was nothing sexist about anything he said. There no reason to go after him/her personally when you didn't even bother to address the points he made.

Posted by Gassman on Monday, 08.29.11 @ 02:41am


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NO Gassman, he didn't. Uneducated people like astrodog do more harm than good because easily influenced people like you will believe anything they hear or read without getting off their butts to find out the truth. In the very least apply some critical thinking skills before you speak.

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Monday, 08.29.11 @ 21:13pm


Rob-ronstadtfanaz (very objective sounding name btw)-You you do realize that "Different Drum" is a cover song first recorded by the Greenbriar Boys? When you try to correct someone it's important to be accurate. Otherwise you look like a fool, not that I would ever imply such a nasty thing. :)

Anyway, I point out the disproportionate amount of covers during her sucessful run during the mid 70s to early 80s, plus the fact that every hit she had was written by other people (for example Long Long Time was written by Gary White), and you respond with nitpicking irrelevance that out of some 25 albums or so she co-wrote a grand total of three songs, not one of which is a hit, and not one of which contributes to why she supposedly should be inducted. Talk about grasping at straws.

Don't shoot the messenger, but if LR could have presented a string of her own hits that she built her career on, she would have much a stronger case. Think of the Joni Mitchell example. You know that whether you care admit it or not. As it stands, she is the successful singer of a lot of covers and other people's songs. Nor were her musical choices all that innovative. Sorry but covering the great American songbook (read: other people's music) is not much of an innovation.
And if covering songs is her forte, did she remake these songs in different genres (think of Devo's cover of Satisfaction for example)? Did she take music in another direction? I must have missed that.

Undoubtedly a very good singer who had a successful career. But that in itself is not i/m/o enough absent other considerations.

As to your entertaining capitalized rant about double standards and tax funding, is your argument really that because the Hall let in some crappy bands, they need to let in some more? OK. Then place LR the head of the list. Seriously, this wedsite is about eliciting opinions about the inclusion of acts in the R&RHF. I don't think LR belongs. If you truly feel that the Hall is constrained by its prior choices to include her, write an angry letter. Or maybe even threaten to sue. Because that's about the only way she is getting in. I'm sure someone with your sunny disposition will very persuasive.







Posted by astrodog on Monday, 08.29.11 @ 23:30pm


@Astrodog - if you're going to quote me, quote me accurately. I said "If Linda Ronstadt is nothing else, she is unmatched in her uncanny ability to choose just the right songs to sing and put on her albums, and to interpret them in a way that won her not only universal acclaim and numerous awards, but sold millions of records and sold out stadiums all over the world for years." Your translation - "She was a good singer who sang conventional, uninnovative, middle of the road material and became popular as a result" is a result of your (somewhat ill-informed) opinion, which is not shared by those familiar with Ronstadt's career, and certainly not by those who have felt her considerable influence.

You say - "To cut this short, there are covers all over her albums which are some of her biggest hits", apparently harping on the fact that a singer whose albums have nothing but covers on them somehow adds to their unacceptability for the HOF. I assume you are also up in arms over Aretha Franklin's induction then? I'm pretty sure she isn't known for writing her own songs, is she? I don't think so. But that fact has not stopped critics from heaping praise on her for her talent for...how shall I say?...ah yes...interpreting other people's songs...just like Linda! Nothing against Aretha, who definitely deserves a place in the HOF, but her entire career was spent almost exclusively in only two genres of music - Soul and R&B. Ronstadt, on the other hand has garnered praise and achieved success in country, country rock, rock & roll, pop, standards, and mariachi. We can even throw in a little opera while we're at it.

Geez, what does it take to get recognized by Jann Wenner and his buddies who sit around deciding if Spooner Oldham...(Spooner Oldham??)...should get in or not. Gimme a break. Spooner may have been an incredible sideman, but I doubt that 99% of the population has ever heard of him, or could name even one song he played on.

I have to agree with you on one thing though - we won't see Linda in the R&RHOF anytime soon, but not for the reasons you've put forward. The simple fact is that almost nobody in the music biz has the guts to admit outloud that Ronstadt's exclusion from the HOF is NOT because of anything to do with her "impact on this music that we broadly call rock and roll", or her "innovation and influence", or even her habit of doing covers(LOL). It's because Jann Wenner and other members of the R&RHOF board just don't like Linda for some reason. That's it in a nutshell.

All your grousing about her not being a songwriter
and whatever else is missing the mark by a mile.

Posted by Dick on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 03:51am


I'm not much of an Aretha Franklin fan so I'll let someone else speak to the differences if they care to. I have my own viewpoint, but it probably has to do with her being considered an R&B pioneer.

I did some math on Ronstadt's first 14 albums (I stopped due to boredom at that point plus bewilderment about that Mariachi album, but the trend also continued with her 1989 album). Anyway, out of 157 songs on those first 14 albums encompassing her heydey, 138 were covers. All the rest were written by other songwriters with the exception of two on her 7th album, Hasten Down the Wind, which she co-wrote which didn't chart. Those are pretty remarkable numbers.




Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 04:18am


She sings other people's songs. Right. We get it.

Are you trying to argue for the HOF to change it's rules and not only bar those artists who don't write their own material, but expel those already in who also didn't write their own songs? Good luck with that. The fact remains that being a singer-songwriter isn't all that important to those deciding who gets in and who doesn't.

BTW, Ronstadt is considered a country rock pioneer along with the likes of The Flying Burrito Brothers, Emmylou Harris, Gram Parsons, Neil Young, and the Eagles. Yet another similarity to Aretha.

In fact, Aretha would be the perfect choice to hand Linda her R&RHOF trophy...if she cared enough to actually go there to pick it up, which is doubtful at this point. But then, if I were her and had been snubbed by those clowns for this length of time, I probably wouldn't give a shit about it either.

Posted by Dick on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 07:20am


Re: Spooner and Scotty Moore... you do realize they were inducted as Side-Men right? I mean, these are people who almost by definition of their job were bound to go unknown by the general public. This is about their contributions to the industry and to the music as a whole. It's much the same way with a lot of the Non-Performers. Leiber-Stoller, Holland-Dozier-Holland, Phil Spector--- sure, those are easy names. But Ralph Bass, Dave Bartholomew, Syd Nathan, Milt Gabler, Art Rupe... not household names, and yet all very worthy for their accomplishments... much like the SideMen, these were people who almost by definition are behind the scenes type of people, who aren't going to get well-known by the public, but are still absolutely deserving. Don't compare Ronstadt to Moore or Oldham... it's very much apples and oranges. And it looks silly to even try.

Posted by Philip on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 07:22am


Dick-I quoted the criteria above. IMO-Very short on originality. Very short on innovation (not surprising when you spend your career predominately recording songs previously recorded by other artists). And her inability to write her own songs reflects both the highly derivative nature of her career, as well as reflecting on her comparative talent with other artists, i.e, the artists she is directly competing with for induction. Dismiss it all you want, but an artist not having the talent to compose the songs that are the basis of that artist's career is a legitimate factor-not conclusive I keep reminding, but a factor nontheless-when weighed against artists that did. I'm sure you can find inconsistencies in the checkered history of the R&RHF. But any prior mistakes would not justify a new one. All in all I don't think LR should be inducted on her own merits as an artist. Conspiracy theories aside, the only way she will get in is if she buys a ticket. But if by some chance in the next couple decades the R&RHF changes its mind and loses its wits and LR is inducted, feel free to gloat. Bye, bye.

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 11:42am


Astrodog you do realize that I said Different Drum had its FIRST CHARTED version in the Billboard Hot 100 Singles in 1967 (by Linda Ronstadt). Exactly when did the Greenbriar Boys SINGLE version of Different Drum hit the Hot 100 charts? Let me know when you figure that one out. If you think you have bested someone who points out your inaccuracies (or lies) I would think you would want to be sure of the facts of what you are actually debating. Your obsession with covers songs prompted me to point out that a number of Linda Ronstadt’s charted singles on the Billboard HOT 100 Singles chart were not covers or re-makes of” previous hits” but you seem to ignore anything that doesn’t fit into astrodogworld. Your opinions about Linda Ronstadt seem to be filled with inaccuracies, double standards and frankly a lot of tripe. Not everyone is a gasman or gasswoman who will believe your hot air but your lies must be pointed out so others have an accurate view of the greatest singer to ever wear the crown and hold the title of The Queen of Rock and Roll.

Posted by Rob- ronstadtfanaz on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 17:26pm


Astrodog - You may call them "inconsistencies" and "mistakes", I call them precedent-establishing criteria. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Posted by Dick on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 17:31pm


I'd also like to clarify the HOF's own criteria, according to their website, for eligibility:

"To be eligible for induction as an artist (as a performer, composer, or musician) into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, the artist must have released a record, in the generally accepted sense of that phrase, at least 25 years prior to the year of induction; and have demonstrated unquestionable musical excellence.

We shall consider factors such as an artist's musical influence on other artists, length and depth of career and the body of work, innovation and superiority in style and technique, but musical excellence shall be the essential qualification of induction."

One startling fact that jumps out at you after reading that is that Linda was eligible for induction since 1994 - 25 years after the release of her first solo album in 1969 (if you count the first Stone Poneys LP, it's 1992). The R&RHOF, founded in 1983, began inductions in 1986 (so they've had plenty of time to consider Ronstadt's career). So Ronstadt has not even been NOMINATED in the - 17 YEARS - since she became eligible!! Think about that for a minute. If you don't think that is either an egregious lack of awareness of Ronstadt's musical excellence, or blatant personal bias for whatever reason on the part of nominating board members, you're delusional.

As I see it, Ronstadt has clearly satisfied all requirements of potential inductees, including:

musical influence on other artists - check

length and depth of career and the body of work - check

innovation and superiority in style and technique - check

and above all, musical excellence - check times 100

So...what's the holdup?

(I can't seem to find any "must write their own material" requirement in there, but I'll keep looking)

Posted by Dick on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 21:28pm


The only possible excuse I think they have left open for not inducting Linda into the Hall of Fame, after every other excuse they've used has proven to be blatantly false and, at worst, downright misogynisitic, is that, unlike peers like Bonnie Raitt who came from a blues background, Linda's musical background is steeped in rural country-and-western music, which, in case anyone has forgotten, combined with black R&B and blues to form rock and roll in the first place. Linda was a primary figure in the late 1960s movement here in Southern California to help reconnect rock with its traditional country music roots, while avoiding the genre's overt right-wing political trappings (one reason why, I think, country has always been considered something of an unwanted and unacknowledged stepchild of rock by the Hall).

If you talk to Sheryl Crow, she'll tell you what a big deal Linda was in her musical life. So too will Emmylou Harris, Jackson Browne, the Eagles, Tift Merritt, Trisha Yearwood, Martina McBride, Lucinda Williams, Randy Newman, Jimmy Webb, Rosanne Cash, and, more recently, alternative country songstress Caitlin Rose. The list of how many of her peers Linda has touched and influenced in her career is staggering; and to deny the hard facts of history when it comes to Linda is to blatantly distort that history as far as I'm concerned

Posted by Erik on Tuesday, 08.30.11 @ 22:44pm


Rob-ronstadtfanaz-It may just be possible that you are overinvolved in Ms. Ronstadt's career. Just a possibility. But whatever makes you happy. After the letter writing campaign and the lawsuit, try wishing upon a star. As to the other fans, good luck and happy hunting.

Posted by astrodog on Wednesday, 08.31.11 @ 00:28am


Well said Dick and Erik. Linda has met all the requirements to the Nth degree so it must be blatant personal bias and misogyny that prevents her inclusion. There isn't much else to say.

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Wednesday, 08.31.11 @ 21:23pm


Just as an aside, astrodog--what are YOUR criteria for who would get in? You seem to think that Linda's fans her are overly obsessed with pursuing a supposedly "pointless" endeavor. What makes you any more of an "expert"?

I think we have made a fairly good case for her induction, while you've only tropped out the same worn-out excuses that Dave Marsh and Robert Christgau have used against here for the better part of thirty-five years. How about putting some money where your mouth is now?

Posted by Erik on Wednesday, 08.31.11 @ 21:32pm


Hey Astrodog,

You were sounding somewhat reasonable until the "dick" comment.

You seem unable or unwilling to address specific disagreements brought up by those here who challenge your points. Please address this particular issue only. I don't want to overload you with too much. Now please reply. You are allowed to admit you were mistaken on this specific point. We won't grovel or hold it against you. You wrote:

Finally, what influence has she had? To be blunt she really didn't influence anyone. What major artist cites Ronstadt.

I and others reply that the following individuals have cited Ronstadt as an influence:

K.D. Lang
Sheryle Crowe
Tricia Yearwood
Pat Benatar
Emmylou Harris
The Eagles
Phoebe Snow
Rosanne Cash
Lucinda Williams
Garth Brooks
Randy Newman
Jimmy Webb
Martina McBride
Dolly Parton
Oh yeah, a few years ago, VH1 asked industry professionals, musicians, recording artists, producers etc to come up with a list of the 100 most influential female recording artists in rock history. Linda ranked #21. The show aired for a few weeks on the channel.
I assume those questioned did not include just us kookie fans who have nothing else better to do with our time.

Posted by Rich on Wednesday, 08.31.11 @ 22:43pm


Do you guys want to share the Kool Aid you are drinking. To be that monomaniacal almost seems pleasant. To see you guys interact in a self-reinforcing echo chamber makes it even better.

Just look how absurdly defensive you guys are? I make what was really a very tame initial comment, simply stating my opinion. Now a confident fanbase would be able to shrug it off. Big deal. A dissenting opinion. But you guys in contrast responded so overheatedly, a laughable mess of sputtering incoherence, capital letters and personal insults, that you really have to wonder what LR fans are so hypersensitive about? If my position was so untenable, would it have required the overkill? Would it require all the various responses? The mutual reinforcement and back-slapping? As a rhetorical rule, you can judge the effectiveness of a point by the violence of the response.

Of course, I made a very simple point: that LR's resume has a massive hole in it due to her inability to write songs and her virtually exclusive reliance on covers and songs that were written for her. Not only does that indisputably reflect on her talent (for example Dolly Parton had the talent to write hit songs), but it also reflects on the highly derivative nature of her music. Her music reflects not one iota of originality.

Again, what is unreasonable about that assessment? Nothing. Yet rather than acknowledge it honestly we get all manner of evasion: (1) that she co-wrote a couple of no account songs in a span of over 25 albums; or (2) that yes she has a disproportionate amount of cover songs, but she had first time hits with a few of them, proving exactly...what? (Actually it proves what I conceded all along, that she is an excellent singer, just not a very original or innovative artist); or (3) the R&RHF has arguably inducted similarly limited artists, so they have to induct LR too, a binding legal precedent, her own merits be damned.

Now the argument is that she is allegedly a great "influence", etc., complete with the obligatory list of artists who supposedly admire her. (Although she influenced Pat Benatar so much that their music sounds nothing alike). But so what? She clearly wasn't was a musical influence in any legitimate sense for the simple reason that she had no original music. And is anyone seriously arguing, the derivative nature of her music aside, that she started soft rock, or southern rock, or country rock? Not that populr music continued in that vein. (Witness her new wave album in 1980).

But really the whole point of listing artists who allegedly admire her is to ignore the clear shortcomings that I have enumerated. To me (as if I haven't repeated this clearly enough)originality matters. Innovation matters. And yes, talent matters, including the talent to be more than just a covers artist, which is predominately what she was. All the ad hominem nonsense aside, is that a lie? A falsehood? A distortion? Actually it's just the truth, albeit a truth the fan club doesn't like. From my point if view, too bad. All the testimonials from all the artists in the world saying how much they admire LR would do nothing to make up for these deficiencies.

Of course anyone is free to have a different criteria. But I made a fair point, something indicated by the longwinded chain of replies. But least you imagine that I have no point at all, that I'm just some embittered hater (actually I have nothing against her in any way), LR has never even been nominated for induction after all these years. Now all the colorful conspiracy theories I've read could be true, or maybe enough objective people (non-fan club members) just don't think she's good enough. In any event, keep impressing yourselves with your kangaroo court sensibilities. Truly, there is no way to refute anything the fan club asserts. Actually it's just tiresome, diehard fans acting like a pathetic mob. With mind-numbing predictability you have managed to convince yourselves about something all of you already believed. Who would have thought it possible? Now manage to convince anyone else.




















Posted by astrodog on Thursday, 09.1.11 @ 02:55am


"Now the argument is that she is allegedly a great "influence", etc., complete with the obligatory list of artists who supposedly admire her. But so what?" -- astrodog

So astrodog...after reading the list of "major artists" that cite Ronstadt as having an influence on them, I assume you concede the fact that you were wrong when you said "she really didn't influence anyone" then? You can admit that, can't you?

Posted by Dick on Thursday, 09.1.11 @ 05:27am


And one more thing, if you don't mind. In your statement early on, where you say "Fact is that Ronstadt did not write any songs. And before we get the stock reply "But Elvis didn't either", Elvis was (a) a pioneer centrally involved in the very origins of rock music, and (b) much more successful", I have to point out that part of the HOF criteria says "Gold records, number one hits, and million sellers are really not appropriate standards for evaluation". This negates your point (b) as it pertains to Elvis.

So are you now prepared to say that the only reason non-songwriter Elvis gets a pass is because he was among the first white guys to sing like black guys, (who had been singing like that long before Elvis ever caught onto it - so much for "originality" I guess), and poor non-songwriter Linda...wasn't the first so...tough luck honey?

Is that the point you're making?

Posted by Dick on Thursday, 09.1.11 @ 05:56am


So your answer to the "influence" question is:


Now the argument is that she is allegedly a great "influence", etc., complete with the obligatory list of artists who supposedly admire her. (Although she influenced Pat Benatar so much that their music sounds nothing alike). But so what? She clearly wasn't was a musical influence in any legitimate sense for the simple reason that she had no original music. And is anyone seriously arguing, the derivative nature of her music aside, that she started soft rock, or southern rock, or country rock? Not that populr music continued in that vein. (Witness her new wave album in 1980).

This statement reveals your skewed view of things. In your world, the only way Ronstadt could ever be a legitimate "influence" to another artist is if she "wrote" her own original songs. Hmmmmm.
So her singing style is completely irrelevant. I big to differ. I am a singer and I have personally found Ronstadt to influence my singing as much as another favorite, Sinatra. If I was to make a record, I would do everything I could to NOT sound exactly like either of them, while I could never deny their affect on my singing. The fact that Benatar's records don't sound exactly like Ronstadt's is irrelevant, All of the artists cited replied "Ronstadt" when asked to cite their influences. We don't need you to redefine what "influence" means.

Posted by Rich on Thursday, 09.1.11 @ 07:57am


Influence is generally amorphous nonsense, something I've argued in other contexts. Does anyone honestly believe that if LR did not exist, these other artists (I'll take your word for it) would not be doing the exact same thing? (Again, did she originate anything?) And you can come up with a similar list for just about any successful artist. (I'm sure Celine Dion has a million admirers). Also I do make a distinction beween personal influence (just someone that an artist likes and admires) and musical influence, doing something innovative that alters subsequent music. Plus music went in a different direction both musically and stylistically. But I will fully concede that as a singer other singers were influenced by her. Happy?

But again, so what? It's avoiding the main problem. Because in the end your hero was little more than an unoriginal covers artist with an excellent voice. A covers artist in the mid 70s well past the age of the singer-songwriter reflects a lazy career. If you care to claim that she had the same historical significance as Elvis, be my guest. (Personally I always thought more highly of Buddy Holly). But really that is going around in circles. By her own merits she is (imo) a second rate artist. If there is a singing hall of fame, she can be inducted there. That is my opinion, over and over and over again.

Posted by astrodog on Thursday, 09.1.11 @ 12:53pm


I think anyone reading these posts will now see that astrodog has little real knowledge about Linda, her career and no real understanding of the RRHOF induction requirements. He has used lies and misinformation to bolster and give credibility to his ill-informed opinions that have little bearing on RRHOF requirements. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the judges (starting with Jann Wenner) suffer from the same virus. Like astrodog they keep moving the” goalpost” through rationalization to match their own personal biases. While these people will never admit they are wrong, calling them out in public is NOT an exercise in futility. Rather it should be a requirement to shine a light on the problem with their thinking so others can see how ridiculous they are. The Hall is already running out of credible nominees and will regret the treatment given to Linda Ronstadt, Heart and others who hopefully will reject their advances for induction unless and until there is a complete turnover in the Politbureau.

Posted by Rob- ronstadtfanaz on Thursday, 09.1.11 @ 17:01pm


Linda certainly has a good voice, but she's done nothing innovative in the industry to warrant induction. Nothing.

I guess that's probably why she has never even been considered.

Probably not gonna happen.

Posted by CJ on Friday, 09.2.11 @ 17:20pm


Evidently CJ you have never listened to Linda's body of work. Having the first alt Country album (Hand Sown Home Grown)and then pioneering the fusion of Country and Rock to form Country-Rock is not innovative? Gimme a break. She was a key figure in that movement. Not only that, most of todays Country music has obviously been influenced by Linda Ronstadt. (especially where the female artists are concerned) Take a listen to some of the bootleg material that is out there i.e. Live from McCabes 1975 to see what she was doing outside of the recording studios.

In an interview with Cameron Crowe:

What’s your take on Linda Ronstadt? I’m surprised that she’s never even been nominated for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame…. do you think it’s due to turning her back on rock/pop or the fact that she wasn’t a songwriter?

A: "Let’s campaign because you’re absolutely right. She’s a pivotal figure in many ways for the people she put together and the songwriters she discovered. Forget what an amazing singer she is. I think what happens sometimes is that when an artist turns their back and says I’m pulling out of the race, they get forgotten. The same thing happened to Laura Nyro. They check out and they don’t spend a lot of time reminding you of the things they’ve done. So let us begin a campaign."

It is a real shame that so many here and outside of this forum know so little about Linda and are so quick to judge from that ignorance. While the RRHOF may not be important to Linda Ronstadt it is very important to her fans and so a "campaign" is what we shall do!



Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Sunday, 09.4.11 @ 02:47am


For the record, I wouldn't have a problem with Linda getting in.

To the points:

Dick, your list of major artists are almost all either country or tinged with country style. The Rock Hall is going to flat-out LAUGH at Martina McBride or Garth Brooks' opinion. They're country, and worse, they're modern mainstream country which is some of the most awful, schlocky music out there today. The only ones they'll give any weight are those of the Eagles (inducted), Lucinda Williams (Previously considered), and Sheryl Crow (a question mark).

As far as alt-country, what year was the album you cite, Rob? Because as far as alt-country goes, Gram Parsons and the Flying Burrito Brothers are considered much more foundational to the subgenre than Linda.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 09.4.11 @ 07:56am


Rob-ronstadtfanaz-So LR pioneered country-rock? Let me think. Gram Parsons. Flying Burrito Brothers. The Byrds. Bob Dylan. Buffalo Springfield. New Riders of the Purple Sage.Poco. The Doobie Brothers. You can even go back to Rockabilly...
We get it. You are an uberfan. Anyone who disagrees with you suffers from Ronstadtitis. The whole world will have to undergo therapy until our opinion aligns with yours. Sanity, after all, is not statistical. We just think that Ronstadt was a deriative, unoriginal artist, or that she didn't have the talent or daring to write her own material. (She discovered new songwriters, damn it!). It's like arguing with a mental patient. I'll let you have the last word (and insult) so that you can feel good about yourself. You have free rein. Call me any name you want. It won't help you on your knight's errand, but take whatever temporary satisfaction you can get. Always leave them happy.

Posted by astrodog on Sunday, 09.4.11 @ 11:14am


"So LR pioneered country-rock? Let me think...The Byrds. Bob Dylan. Buffalo Springfield." -- astrodog

The Byrds: inducted in 1991

Bob Dylan: inducted in 1988

Buffalo Springfield: inducted in 1997

(and one you forgot) The Eagles: inducted in 1998

Why should they be inducted, and not fellow-pioneer Linda Ronstadt?

Posted by Dick on Sunday, 09.4.11 @ 13:41pm


Not gonna happen.

Posted by Marissa Burle on Sunday, 09.4.11 @ 14:13pm


Hey Douchebag, I mean ASS-TRODOG.
Don't use the term 'WE' unless you are speaking on behalf of all of your A=hole personalities. You are only one in your ASS-TRODOG world who is so anti-Ronstadt. It is your world and yours alone. You are obviously in need of psychological help. For someone who claims to merely possess an opinion, you have posted more regarding Ronstadt than anyone. Your obsession speaks for itself. Good luck in therapy.

Posted by Rich on Sunday, 09.4.11 @ 23:54pm


astrodog. I have already proven you to be a known liar and a very misinformed one at that so nothing you have to say whether it is under your name or another has any credibility. The insults you have reduced yourself to are a laugh.

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Monday, 09.5.11 @ 00:18am


Phillip, Rock and Roll had its origins in Country music among others. Why would the RRHOF laugh at that?

"Rock and roll (often written as rock & roll or rock 'n' roll) is a genre of popular music that originated and evolved in the United States during the late 1940s and early 1950s,[1][2] primarily from a combination of the blues, country music, jazz,[3] and gospel music.[4] Though elements of rock and roll can be heard in country records of the 1930s,[3] and in blues records from the 1920s,[5] rock and roll did not acquire its name until the 1950s.[6][7] An early form of rock and roll was rockabilly,[8] which combined country and jazz with influences from traditional Appalachian folk music and gospel." (from wikipedia)

To answer your other question Hand Sown Home Grown was released in 1969 and Linda Ronstadt was among the pioneers of the Country Rock movement and not the "only" pioneer. Definitely one of the few women involved.

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Monday, 09.5.11 @ 00:31am


Anyone who doubts what myself and others here have been saying in regards to Linda's influence, inspiration and creativeness then you may find this book enlightening:

Desperados: The Origins of Country Rock and the Roots of New Country
by John Einarson
Trisha Yearwood, Travis Tritt, Clint Black, Confederate Railroad, Brooks and Dunn, Terri Clark, Little Texas, Diamond Rio, Restless Heart. What do all these New Country artists have in common? Each has roots firmly planted in the seminal Southern California country rock of the
late 1960s and early 1970s, drawing on the influences of pioneering rock artists who merged traditional country music with rock'n'roll to create a vibrant hybrid called country rock. These artists -- The Byrds, Flying Burrito Brothers, Poco, Gram Parsons, Emmylou Harris, Great Speckled Bird, Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, Linda Ronstadt, Jackson Brown, and The Eagles -- all desperados, outlaws from the musical mainstream whose hole-in-the-wall was L.A.'s legendary Troubadour club -- forged a fresh sound which forever altered the course of contemporary music. Desperados documents the evolution of the genre through extensive interviews with the founders and profiles of the country rock and new country heirs. Desperados is published to coincide with the induction of The Eagles into the Rock'n'Roll Hall of Fame and the 30th anniversary of Gram Parson's death, to be commemorated with a special tribute CD produced by Emmylou Harris.

"Music lovers and historians will widen their trivia repertoire with this book and its discography, and they'll appreciate the tribute paid to those who rocked country-style before it was cool."

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Monday, 09.5.11 @ 17:53pm


"Phillip, Rock and Roll had its origins in Country music among others. Why would the RRHOF laugh at that?"--Rob

First, please spell with only one L. I'd appreciate the courtesy, thank-you.

To answer your question, three reasons:

"... and most of all remember that rock and roll is the music of the Black man."--Jann S. Wenner, President of the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame Foundation, opening speech of the 2008 induction ceremony.

And he's not alone, either. To many music critics and historians, rock'n'roll is considered first and foremost a subgenre of R&B. Whatever the facts say, they're no match for the common consensus among the powers that be.

Two, country music is almost a world of its own, culturally. It already has its own Hall of Fame, a good quarter century before rock'n'roll did; there's now minimal crossover to the pop audience, and even then it's more to the Adult Contemporary than the Top 40 Crowd; and its coverage via media outlets are generally much different than that of the rock crowd. If country artists were that revered overall, we'd have George Jones, Buck Owens, Eddy Arnold, etc. all already inducted into the Hall of Fame. We don't.

Three, the artists you mentioned are mostly modern mainstream country, which a friend of mine calls "Nashville pop" to signify that it's not even really real country. And it's crap. Call me subjective, but I find Martina, Garth, Trisha, Clint, etc. to be part of a genre that is of the most uncreative, unimaginitive, unchallenging, stereotype-embracing, overproduced, schlocky, vapid, lowest-common-denominator-pandering pap ever recorded. And again, I would say I'm not alone either. The overarching criterion for the Hall, after 25 years' wait, is "unquestionable musical excellence." Martina, Garth, and Trisha put together have less of that than even Percy Sledge. I mean, really... Confederate Railroad? They were country's answer to the New Kids On The Block. Nothing more.

That's why they're NEVER gonna consider the opinion of decidedly country artists with any real weight.

Lastly, don't point to Elvis when rebutting the fact that the majority of Linda's work was literally cover versions. It's like comparing a dune to a mountain, a plateau to a mesa... just not even on the same scale. If you're being truly honest, Linda's realm of influence in the rock'n'roll world as a mostly-covers artist puts her more on pace with Pat Boone or Johnny Rivers. That's not meant as an insult... it wouldn't bother me too greatly to see either of those two get in either, though I've never been a Johnny Rivers fan... but Linda Ronstadt is really more comparable to those two than Elvis.

Posted by Philip on Tuesday, 09.6.11 @ 07:42am


I always get annoyed when people act as if rock and roll is a purely black genre. it's more halfcast than anything. Yeah, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bo Diddely and Fats Domino were black, but Jerry lee Lewis, Elvis, Buddy Holly and Bill Haley werne't. R&B and the blues whcich infulenced it are predominantly black genres, but Country and Folk, also influences, aren't.

Posted by GFW on Tuesday, 09.6.11 @ 12:54pm


I agree. I mean, why else were Jimmie Rodgers, Hank Williams, Bill Monroe, Bob Wills And His Texas Playboys, and Pete Seeger inducted as Early Influences if it were a purely Black genre? Unfortunately, a lot of those definitions are also pretty fluid when it pertains to acts they like and are of pet status. I'm not totally immune to it either, nor any of us really. As I've said, I've always been much more champion of the notion as RnR as the music of the youth, which is why I'm so adamant about getting Bernie Lowe recognized. But yeah, none of us are NomCom or SubCom members.

That said, if I could name one person as the "Father of Rock And Roll", it would unequivocally be Clyde McPhatter.

Posted by Philip on Tuesday, 09.6.11 @ 13:58pm


Jann Wenner is not exactly an honest broker by any means and to quote him as if it were "fact" or "truth" is intellectually dishonest. The Hall itself heavily promotes Rock and Rolls Country / Folk / Bluegrass roots as do other historians. Country/Western was a big influence on folk-rockers like Steve Stills and Neil Young, and The Byrds, and a smaller but still significant impact on Bob Dylan, The Beatles and The Rolling Stones.

Also, could someone please show me the RRHOF requirement in writing that forbids the nomination and induction into the Hall of an artist that has performed and recorded covers because if you cannot then you have no valid arguement. It then becomes your personal bias which frankly is neither here nor there. Unless the Hall wishes to "de-induct" the better part of those admitted I don't consider personal biases valid discussion. If you don't like an artist fine but it is quite annoying for pseudo-intellectual wannabe critics (and for the HOF) to be uneven (and unfair) in their application of their own rules and guidelines.

I also have to wonder about people who wander about this website and enter nonsense on artists threads that they clearly dislike for personal reasons. What's the point? We get it, you don't like Linda Ronstadt none of which has to do with the Halls requirements for nomination and induction. Their nomination process is clearly flawed giving those that vote to induct questionable choices. It must be embarrassing for some of them.

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Tuesday, 09.6.11 @ 16:37pm


"That is my opinion, over and over and over again. astrodog"

Astrodog, that makes you a troll.

Posted by Beau on Tuesday, 09.6.11 @ 19:12pm


I was watching ET one night and Cher cited Linda Ronstadt as an influence. They sound nothing alike. And Cher's career actually pre-dates Linda's. Some artists have been influenced by Linda but probably would not admit it because they're too cool.

And Sheryl Crow cites Ronstadt and Nicks as her two greatest influences, but sound nothing like either of them.

Someone counted the number of Linda's covers up to a certain point, but I think their count was off. Often Linda recorded a song first (Heart Like a Wheel, Faithless Love, for example) and it was later recorded by the writer. That does not magically make Linda's version a cover... it remains the original recording. That relates back to her influence, that she was so powerful that by recording someone's song, it gave them more ammunition to get their own recording contract.

Posted by Beau on Tuesday, 09.6.11 @ 19:18pm


It seems like some people enjoy putting Linda down and that she does not deserve to be in the RRHoF.

It seems like other people enjoy fighting the people who enjoy putting Linda down and out of the RRHoF.

Some people enjoy pushing other people's buttons and acting like a snob.

Other people like a good fight, and playing savior to a martyr.

It's very similar to partisan politics. The real issues get lost in a sea of posturing and posing.

Some people can't get past Linda doing a couple of boring versions of oldies, and her Roller Skate outfit. In my opinion that is like trying to keep Elton John out of the RRHoF for doing things like making a disco album and wearing a duck suit on stage.

IMHO, what Linda did between 1969 and 1974 alone should get her into the RRHoF. While some of those records are kinda rough, having rough sounding records is one of the things that help get you into the RRHoF. She helped pioneer a whole sub-genre of Rock 'n' Roll, was a HUGE influence on at least two generations of female singers, and those records are great.

But uh-oh.... The evolution of Country Rock into early California singer-songwriter Rock isn't considered too hip these days. No, I think The Strokes have a better chance of making the RRHoF because they are skinny, wear leather jackets, smoke cigarettes, come from NEW YORK, and sound like the New York Dolls grand kiddies (hey, I love the Dolls, and I like The Strokes). That is the image that is considered cool, that is always considered cool, and not some hippie chick in a cotton patchwork dress.

But how about a hot chick in super short skirts or hot pants, barefoot, with no bra? That kind of thing is still considered cool, and that *WAS* Linda Ronstadt from 1966 to 1974. You'd think that would get her elected alone!!!

Its all about image and attitude, and Linda left that behind, which insults a lot of people.

Posted by Cisco on Tuesday, 09.6.11 @ 22:35pm


Apart from the repetitious (and, to put it mildly, SPECIOUS) arguments made by astrodog and Philip (provided they aren't one and the same), I really think that there is a distinct East Coast bias against anyone from the West Coast, such as Linda. Most of her friends that are already in there, including the Eagles, were treated very shabbily in their heyday by the so-called East Coast "intellectual" critics (Marsh; Christgau, etc.), and likely got in with a grudging respect at most.

Maybe the problem those "intellectuals" had with Linda was not merely her popularity, but the fact that she was her own woman and had an independent streak that p***ed them off. And maybe they don't think that someone with as clear and powerful a voice as Linda's could possibly be a rock icon, which I think goes triple for "astrodog" and Philip here. The evidence, except maybe to those two trolls, is there for all to see.

I'd also remind those two that Linda's voice is a totally natural thing, in that what you hear is what you get from her. No AutoTune is needed for her, like it is for someone with the kind of irritating vocal mannerisms of a Taylor Swift. On that score, I think that any open-minded person would think your arguments not only specious, but borderline ludicrous.

Posted by Erik on Tuesday, 09.6.11 @ 22:39pm


1. I'm not East Coast. Eastern Time Zone, maybe, but not even living there anymore.

2. Rob asked me why they wouldn't take country artists' opinions seriously. I gave him three reasons. I didn't say they were the best, but facts and people being what and who they are, that's just how it works.

3. Erik's "strong and independent woman" argument is a strawman. Complete and utter BS.

4. I'm not astrodog.

Posted by Philip on Wednesday, 09.7.11 @ 07:04am


You make a horse's a** of yourself, Philip, by displaying a total and willful ignorance of Linda's career in what you've just accused me of, and it's laughable in the extreme.

Posted by Erik on Wednesday, 09.7.11 @ 09:42am


No, Erik, your argument was a strawman, because you just assumed that I don't support Linda Ronstadt because she was a strong, independent woman. This is bogus because first of all, I don't object to Linda being inducted. I don't think she's anywhere near the most glaring omission, but I'd probably vote for her if she got on the ballot. Second, your accusation is pathetic because if you even bothered to read outside this page, you'd see my support of other female performers. I was among the most adamant supporters of Darlene Love getting inducted, another woman with an amazing voice, a voice with the soul and power to flatten the mountains themselves. I've also stated my support for Connie Francis, Lesley Gore, Pat Benatar, Janet Jackson, etc. No issue with strong women. Third, your accusation is flawed because the arguments on my part have for the most part been addressing why Rob's arguments aren't very good ones, in terms of convincing the ones you'd really need to convince: the NomCom members. He asked, and I copy-and-paste to quote: "Phillip, Rock and Roll had its origins in Country music among others. Why would the RRHOF laugh at that?" Note: he asked why WOULD they, not why SHOULD they. They WOULD because the powers-that-be are seemingly bent on political correctness and making sure that the White contribution is significantly downplayed. They also WOULD because country music is almost like its own universe with its own award show, its own Hall of Fame, and little crossover (that isn't heavily toned down or sapped up for Adult Contemporary crowds). The only reason they SHOULD laugh is because all those artists that Rob (not Dick's list) mentioned that Linda influenced make horrible music... modern mainstream country is artistically void (another reason they would as well, they love the super-artistic stuff) and is practically a parody of itself with no basis in actual backwoods-country feel. When George Jones says Carrie Underwood is not country, people ought to listen. When it comes to influence, they want to make sure the artist in question influenced GOOD music. Martina, Garth, Confederate Railroad... not good music. You have a much better argument sticking to the Eagles, Sheryl Crow, Pat Benatar, etc.

Side note: Rob, your comments about Wenner are accurate, but they don't negate the fact that he is still the man with the power. Much of the NomCom are/were his subordinates or are his personal friends. Whatever flaws he has, he's still got sway regarding who gets in.

As far as alt-country, this has been the best argument so far for Linda, honestly, but most of the pioneers listed who HAVE been inducted were only pioneers of alt-country after firmly establishing themselves in folk-rock. The Rock Hall hasn't really given any credence to alt-country. Gram Parsons was notably omitted from the inducted members of the Byrds, he still hasn't been inducted as a soloist or with the Flying Burrito Brothers.

Linda's got an amazing voice and diverse talent, but as we've told the Steve Perry sycophants, having an amazing voice (and even a lot of albums) just isn't enough. Not because it isn't good music, it just isn't what the powers-that-be at the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame Foundation usually look for. A matter of what is versus what should be. And that's the standpoint that astrodog and others are arguing from.

Posted by Philip on Wednesday, 09.7.11 @ 17:03pm


I like Linda and her ability to take previously recorded songs and make them her own. But, it is kinda telling that she has not even been nominated since first becoming eligible. She may end up being the female Neil Diamond- he had to wait 22 years! However, she's not really continuing to record regular albums as he has been doing.

Posted by JR on Wednesday, 09.7.11 @ 18:22pm


I have to agree with JR. Why would the Hall choose to recognize her now - this year? (maybe I'm missing something)

I vote No.

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, 09.7.11 @ 18:59pm


I think you are indeed missing something, Mike: a thorough going-over of the woman's entire 45-year career.

And at this moment, are you ready to mount a defense for Madonna, who evidently didn't need to do a single rock and roll record of any kind of get in? All her peep show theatrics ever did was give the world Britney Spears and Katy Perry, and that's not a compliment.

And Philip--Wenner only has the sway he does because of all the cronies he has on the board, and virtually none of them ever played in a band, wrote a single note or word, or sung a lick. Rob's point about Wenner is that he, for all of the liberal bluster he espouses, he is a freuqently an extremely poor judge of character and an arbitary judge of rock and roll history, a history made by the musicians, the singers, and the fans, and not a bunch of snobby critics in some cubicle somewhere.

Posted by Erik on Wednesday, 09.7.11 @ 22:31pm


Linda Ronstadt, Stevie Nicks (solo), Heart and Pat Benatar are still not in the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame.

Who did they offend so deeply that they are still not deservedly honored by this institution?

I don't get it.

Posted by let's get real here on Thursday, 09.8.11 @ 21:00pm


Erik, all that aside, he still has the power. He's still in charge. Say what you want about him, he's still in charge. It does no good to assail his character, because it won't succeed in overcoming the simple fact that he's got that much influence and power.

Posted by Philip on Friday, 09.9.11 @ 07:11am


For the record Philip is not me. It's amusing that I made a pretty tame initial comment and the uberfans went bananas. This thread lost credibility when fans tried to compare LR to Elvis and Bob Dylan. Throw the Beatles in there and we'll have quite the hat trick of delusional exaggeration.

It's not snobbery or malice to evaluate an artist's career honestly and point out the comparative strengths and weaknesses. I did the same thing (right or wrong) with Sonic Youth, Joy Division, Kiss, Kraftwerk, the Buzzcocks.

I have to say that I'm not too impressed with the whole country rock argument. Anyone who heard early Elvis, Orbison, Ricky Nelson or Johnny Cash recordings (see for example his performance of "Get Rythmn" with the Tennessee Two) knows that country and rock have a long history. The early Sun Records catalog is a good primer. There was absolutely nothing revolutionary about combining them. And the country rock that dominated early 70s FM radio was a much more staid affair than earlier country/rock music, often considered safe, tepid and stale by music writers.

But whatever your feelings about country rock (and disregarding how backward looking it really was) the main issue in calling LR a "pioneer" is chronological. There were simply too many earlier and more influential albums by Dylan, the Byrds (look up 1968's "The Notorious Byrd Brothers" and more directly "Sweetheart of the Rodeo"), the Flying Burrito Brothers, the Buffalo Springfield, the Everly Brothers ("Roots" from 1968), the Beau Brummels, and Gram Parsons. You also had a bunch of concurrent releases by Poco (1969), New Riders of the Purple Sage (1970), and Emmylou Harris (1970). When you already have major recording artists like the Bryds and Dylan and established acts like the Everly Brothers doing country rock albums, it becomes very difficult to describe Ronstadt as any sort of "pioneer." Rather LR was taking part in what was a major shift in music by a number of musical artists, a shift that predates her efforts in the genre.

Even a review of her 1969 album ("Hand Sown...Home Grown") makes the "pioneer" claim seem rather weak. On the album she covers Dylan and The Flying Burrito Brothers. Far from being a pioneering effort, this 1969 album is actually derivative. (It amounts to claiming that someone is a punk pioneer because they did a later album covering Ramones songs). Add to that that "Hand Sown" did not chart, and the claims of an immediate impact on what was and became a tidal wave of country rock releases is hard to justify.

That is just my take. I'm sure the fans are going to love it. But they seem so reasonable and decent that I thought I should make another contribution.

Posted by astrodog on Friday, 09.9.11 @ 14:14pm


You overlooked one thing about the Flying Burrito Brothers, astrodog. Their album THE GUILDED PALACE OF SIN didn't exactly fly off the shelves in its day, either; it barely charted. It is only in retrospect that that album is considered a landmark. Initial sales or chart placements do not tell the complete story.

And again, you seem to be deliberately selling what Linda was doing extremely short. While all of those groups you mentioned deserve a nod for the emergence of country-rock in the late 1960s, Linda was the only female artist at the time doing it--maybe not successfully at first, at least in your estimation, but, according to those who worked with her during that period, they counted her as a pioneer and they still do. She knew that country music was still thought of as the province of the rednecks, the right-wingers, and such, but she also felt that if she could do those songs both respectfully and with a rock-influenced approach, the negative opinions rock fans had about country music would fall away. By that standard, and even though it took her several years to accomplish this, she succeeded brilliantly, and paved the way for other women to follow, starting with her good pal Emmylou Harris, and continuing on into the present day.

Posted by Erik on Friday, 09.9.11 @ 18:13pm


The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame made its first mistake when they came up with their name. Obviously, being famous has little to do with induction. Every generation has its voices and Linda Ronstadt is certainly one of the great female voices of MY generation. I am 54. Can you imagine our parents having such debates about whether or not to induct Frank Sinatra, Tony Bennet, Ella Fitzgerald and a slew of others into their generation's "Hall Of Fame"? Would one of the brilliant intellectuals on here please do the common sense thing and petition the hall to rename themselves to something more appropriate? Perhaps "Baby Boomer Elitist Hall Of Musical Favorites"? At least those of us seeking to enshrine our generations voices for posterity can seek a more appropriate venue and peacefully leave this group.

Posted by Mike on Saturday, 09.10.11 @ 10:31am


Erik, I don't think the "first woman doing it" thing really flies. With the Women Who Rock exhibit, I think now's one of the better years for Linda to have a shot, but I've spoken out against the idea that rock'n'roll should have a pink timeline and a blue timeline, that women doing it is just as innovative as men doing it, even if they did years afterwards. There are a lot of people who agree with your evaluation, though. I'm not one of them. People used that argument to justify Wanda Jackson's Early Influence induction, and it just doesn't wash with me. Alt-country-rock was in motion by the time Linda jumped on board. Being the first female to do it isn't "innovation", imho.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 09.11.11 @ 19:03pm


It's really not about whether there should be a pink or a blue timeline for who gets in. It is about looking very closely at the merits what an artist has accomplished and what they have inspired in others. Linda has met each and every one of the standards for induction. Maybe she wasn't innovative by being the first female artist to succeed in the country-rock genre, but I never even SAID she was innovative. Besides, innovation isn't even part of the criteria for induction into the Hall of Fame in the first place. Just about every innovator of rock and roll that everyone can think of is already in there.

Maybe Linda's only crime is that she is primarily a singer and an interpreter--which, by the way, can be said for pretty much 70% of everybody already in there. By the reckoning of all her peers, however, and those writers whose songs she's recorded, those gifts of hers loom pretty large.

This is especially true when it comes to the womenfolk. She helped make it possible for women to operate in a largely all-male field without sacrificing their feminimity, and that is not the easiest thing in the world to do. Many of her female peers think extremely highly of her, including someone as musically different from Linda as Pat Benatar. This is no small thing Linda helped set the table for; this is the glass ceiling being shattered for real. And while it's all good and fine that the Hall have this Women Who Rock exhibit of theirs, acknowledging Linda, it falls short when she and other women of similar standing don't have their own individual places in the Hall itself.

Posted by Erik on Monday, 09.12.11 @ 14:08pm


Hey Astrodog (or one of your defenders),

Could you please expound your prior comment with specific examples of how it is true? I was always under the impression that Linda was VERY involved in the composition of her recordings.

"Not writing your own material isn't an automatic disqualification, but Ronstadt would have a much better case if she had been involved in the musical composition of her albums. In that sense even Donna Summer has an advantage over her."

Thank you.

Posted by Richie on Tuesday, 09.13.11 @ 10:24am


Why did she get fat?

Posted by zooz on Tuesday, 09.13.11 @ 13:12pm


I'm not sure why Linda got fat but her voice was better than ever last time I heard her just a few years ago.

Posted by Richie on Tuesday, 09.13.11 @ 16:29pm


For those of you who are either are too young or not familiar with Ronstadt's full career, she was selling out stadiums in the late 1970s and was considered the female face of rock and roll. Here is video footage of a 1976 concert in San Diego. So before you let the very talented and opinionated folks on here re-write history, please see for yourself what real people were doing at real places during Linda's heyday:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OMh5bajp9k

Posted by Richie on Tuesday, 09.13.11 @ 16:39pm


As to why Linda "got fat", as you call it zooz, contrary to what YOU might think, she did not gorge on unhealthy foods or "let herself go", as so many snarky gossipers and naysayers have said. During the early 1990s, she was felled by a condition known as Hashimoto's thyroiditis, which essentially is a thyroid disease. To control it, she had to take cortisone treatments, whose unfortunate side effect is that it tended to cause her substantial fatigue and weight gain. She knew as far back as the early 1970s that she might be prone to this condition, but it didn't seriously manifest itself for another twenty years.

She is doing far better nowadays, even if she doesn't look like she did in her heyday. But then again, who does, anyway?

Posted by Erik on Wednesday, 09.14.11 @ 22:04pm


Wait - some of you are defending her getting fat as a reason to why she's not going to be nominated. Wow.

I'll say it again, she has a nice voice. But, what else? Nothing much. Sorry .... skeleton skinny or big as a house, it's a no.

Posted by CJ on Wednesday, 09.14.11 @ 22:09pm


Hey douchebag, I mean CJ. Where in any of the comments about Linda's weight is it implied that her non-induction is due to weight gain? Try to keep up with the rest of us, and don't bother commenting again because. Yes, we know, we know, for CJ, it's a 'no'.

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, 09.14.11 @ 22:28pm


You have really interesting blog, keep up posting such informative posts!

Posted by lexapro on Friday, 09.16.11 @ 01:53am


Thanks! Have you read it from the start? You should. It might just knock you off your high horse.

Posted by Mike on Friday, 09.16.11 @ 20:34pm


If someone told you in 1979 there would someday be a Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame, where musical artists would be enshrined for posterity it would have sounded like a new and wonderful concept (and it did). If that same person then told you they had a crystal ball enabling them to see the future and one of the women who would be nominated for several consecutive years circa 2010 would be Donna Summer, (then the current Queen of Disco), you would have laughed and told them there was something wrong with their crystal ball. You might have suspected they were on drugs. If they then told you that Linda Ronstadt was not yet enshrined, nor yet considered, you would have then told them to seek help, because that would be utterly impossible since Linda was the reigning Queen Of Rock and Roll. You would have then asked them what planet this Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame existed on.
Well that was 1979, and today it seems the world has been turned upside down, by God knows who.

Posted by Marco on Tuesday, 09.27.11 @ 22:39pm


Marco,none of the above false arguments, biases, rationalizations, misogyny of the contributors or talent of Linda Ronstadt who was the reigning Queen of Rock in the 1970's matters. What matters is a small minded angry demi-god in the form of Jann Wenner has co-opted the genre and history of Rock and Roll to do with as he chooses. Nothing else matters. He has set himself up to be the arbiter of Rock and like George Bush he is the "decider." (until of course he gets thrown out, dies or gets a conscience) Arguing with the (paid?) moderators here doesn't matter a bit. Linda Ronstadt's legacy in music whether in Rock and Roll (which is just a small part of her achievements)or other musical genres that even Elvis couldn't match are etched in musical history and cannot be changed even by Jann Wenner. I have no doubt she will be inducted at some point but for now it makes no sense to waste our time or dampen our spirits on websites like this and among people with little honor or honesty.

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Monday, 10.3.11 @ 17:41pm


I discovered Linda Ronstadt in 2008 and think she's one of the best singers of all time. How can it be that Rock and Roll Hall of Fame ignore sucha talented, multi-facets artist? "Heart Like A Wheel" and "Canciones de mi Padre" albums are enough to grant her induction.

Posted by peter on Saturday, 10.29.11 @ 07:42am


These criticisms of Ronstadt are bizarre.
Should Aretha Franklin not be in the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame because she is overweight? What about Jerry Garcia? Is this the argument against Heart not being in the Hall of Fame because of its lead singer? Or are people keeping Stevie Nicks out because she put on weight years ago (although she has lost most if it)?

What about all the rock & pop stars in and out of the Hall Fame who rarely wrote their own music? So so so many. Or those whose hits were cover songs as well? Strange.

And Ronstadt's outspokeness? Wouldn't that have barred Bob Dylan or John Lennon?

Or are people still holding Linda Ronstadt responsible for Apartheid in So. Africa because she sang there once, even though Sinatra, Tina Turner, Rod Stewart, and many other rockers including African-American ones.

So what if young people aren't buying her music? Do you really think young people are listening to Bruce Springsteen, The Supremes, Michael Jackson, Madonna, Aretha Franklin, the Rolling Stones, Blondie, and Bonnie Raitt or the majority of the inductees? Really? Michael Jackson is the only one who might have charted recently but that is probably due to his premature death.

Linda Ronstadt paved the way for Heart, Stevie Nicks and the 1970s version of Fleetwood Mac, Pat Benatar, Blondie, Chrissie Hynde et al...

Look the bottom line is as follows:

She has been called the “Queen of Rock.“
She has been called “The First Lady Of Rock.“
She has earned 11 Grammys, two Academy Of Country Music awards, an Emmy, an American Latino Media Arts award and she has received Tony and Golden Globe nominations.
She ranked No. 1 female singles seller in 1975 and 1977.
COMBINING ALBUMS AND SINGLE, SHE IS ONE OF THE HIGHEST RANNKING ARTISTS IN THE HISTORY OF RECORDED MUSIC.

All told, she has posted 38 singles on the Billboard Hot 100, reaching the top 10 on 10 different occasions, No. 2 three times and the top spot once. On the Billboard top album charts, she has 36 entries, including 10 that reached the top 10 and three that hit No. 1.
She has reached the UK top 40 with five albums and three singles, including a No. 2 single in 1989.
Between 1969 and 1994 she has had 20 singles reach the Canadian top 40, including two that peaked at No. 2 and two that reached No. 1, and nine top 20 LPs, including the “Trio” album, which hit No. 4, and “Simple Dreams,” which topped the Canadian charts.
On the Country charts, she has had solo albums and a single reach No. 1 in addition to a No. 1 collaboration with Dolly Parton and Emmylou Harris.
She is considered the FIRST female solo artist popular enough to pack large concert arenas.
She was named top female artist of the 70s by Cash Box magazine.
She was the first female to have three consecutive platinum albums and her “Living In The USA” became the first album to ship double platinum. In addition, her “Canciones De Mi Padre” is the best selling non-English language album in United States history.
YET SHE IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO GET EVEN A NOMINATION FROM THE ROCK & ROLL HALL OF FAME!!!
This has to be some kind of sick joke.
She is, of course, Linda Ronstadt.

Posted by get real on Friday, 12.2.11 @ 20:25pm


Because Victoria was nice enough to request it, here below is what
Sheryl Crow had to say about Linda in Rolling Stone's recent issue
about Women In Rock (October 30, 2003):

"When I was a kid, I absolutely worshipped Linda Ronstadt. I'm of a
generation that grew up before MTV and VH1, so for me, the big
moment of impact was seeing a black-and-white picture of Linda in
something like a pair of cutoffs and tube socksa and roller skates
looking into her refrigerator. I mean, how hot can you be? That
was before girls were out there showing it all, and she just had
this little-girl innocence, but this total sex appeal."

"I bought those early records of hers at a place called Ben
Franklin, which was a dime store. They had a record rack in the
back, and right next to that they had a soda fountain. We used to
go back to the magazine rack with out albums, and we would read our
album covers, and we would buy magazines like Rolling Stone and even
Teen Beat and just pore over those magazines and drink cherry
Cokes. I know it sounds like something off "The Waltons", but it's
true.

"Coming from where I did, I loved that Linda was so deeply
influenced by country music. She brought country inflections into a
rock & roll world. She could sing a Stones tune, and she could sing
a Hank Williams song. What could be cooler than that? And I loved
that she wasn't afraid to be beautiful, but she could also stand up
there onstage with a bunch of rock guitars and really belt it out,
which made her even sexier. She just seemed so much a flower in a
man's world."

"She did so much so well. She really set a high standard, and her
achievements are overlooked now, but I still listen to her records,
and I still think she is one of the great female rock and country
singers ever. HEART LIKE A WHEEL is unbelievable. Even the Stone
Poneys stuff--"Different Drum" is amazing."

"It's funny about wanting to be like Linda ronstadt, because when I
got to be a teenager, the way she looked somehow didn't seem that
far away. It was a little more difficult to put on a pair of
platforms and a shawl and pull off the whole Stevie Nicks thing--
that seemed so much more mystical and mythical, and maybe
impossible. But being like Linda seemed more possible. You could
almost see yourself in her place someday. I know that I did."

So...who says that young people don't admire their elders anymore?
(LOL). Thank you, Sheryl Crow!

Posted by stop the foolishness on Friday, 12.2.11 @ 20:26pm


Sheryl Crow, a great musician, and another successful female solo artist in rock and pop had the following to say about Linda Ronstadt (and I am confident that she knows what she speaks of as opposed to the know-nothing hateful critics blogging and flailing away here about Ronstadt):

Sheryl Crow had to say about Linda in Rolling Stone's (Rolling Stone can you imagine?) issue about Women In Rock (October 30, 2003):

"When I was a kid, I absolutely worshipped Linda Ronstadt. I'm of a
generation that grew up before MTV and VH1, so for me, the big
moment of impact was seeing a black-and-white picture of Linda in
something like a pair of cutoffs and tube socksa and roller skates
looking into her refrigerator. I mean, how hot can you be? That
was before girls were out there showing it all, and she just had
this little-girl innocence, but this total sex appeal."

"I bought those early records of hers at a place called Ben
Franklin, which was a dime store. They had a record rack in the
back, and right next to that they had a soda fountain. We used to
go back to the magazine rack with out albums, and we would read our
album covers, and we would buy magazines like Rolling Stone and even
Teen Beat and just pore over those magazines and drink cherry
Cokes. I know it sounds like something off "The Waltons", but it's
true.

"Coming from where I did, I loved that Linda was so deeply
influenced by country music. She brought country inflections into a
rock & roll world. She could sing a Stones tune, and she could sing
a Hank Williams song. What could be cooler than that? And I loved
that she wasn't afraid to be beautiful, but she could also stand up
there onstage with a bunch of rock guitars and really belt it out,
which made her even sexier. She just seemed so much a flower in a
man's world."

"She did so much so well. She really set a high standard, and her
achievements are overlooked now, but I still listen to her records,
and I still think she is one of the great female rock and country
singers ever. HEART LIKE A WHEEL is unbelievable. Even the Stone
Poneys stuff--"Different Drum" is amazing."

"It's funny about wanting to be like Linda ronstadt, because when I
got to be a teenager, the way she looked somehow didn't seem that
far away. It was a little more difficult to put on a pair of
platforms and a shawl and pull off the whole Stevie Nicks thing--
that seemed so much more mystical and mythical, and maybe
impossible. But being like Linda seemed more possible. You could
almost see yourself in her place someday. I know that I did."

So...who says that young people don't admire their elders anymore?
(LOL). Thank you, Sheryl Crow!

Posted by stop the foolishness now on Friday, 12.2.11 @ 20:29pm


YET SHE IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO GET EVEN A NOMINATION FROM THE ROCK & ROLL HALL OF FAME!!!
This has to be some kind of sick joke.
___________________________________

Not a joke at all. Just a fair and honest assessment of her career. If commercial sales was the sole criteria then maybe she would have been nominated at some point. I do admire that she has a passionate fan base, although passion seems to be mixed with a lot of denial. Maybe she'll be nominated next year. You never know.

Posted by astrodog on Saturday, 12.3.11 @ 13:11pm


It is beyond belief that Linda Ronstadt is not in the hall of fame! She is one of the best selling and most influential female artists ever! Without Ronstadt there may have been no Eagles!

Posted by Darrell Russ on Monday, 12.5.11 @ 11:17am


Here is a link to a recent internet post regarding Linda's exclusion from the Rock Hall. Admittedly, I only wish I could have come close to articulating some of the author's points.

http://popshifter.com/2011-12-05/linda-ronstadt-not-so-easy/

Posted by Rich on Wednesday, 12.7.11 @ 12:26pm


Quite insightful submit. Never believed that it was this simple after all. I had spent a beneficial deal of my time looking for someone to explain this subject clearly and you're the only one that ever did that. Kudos to you! Keep it up

Posted by dmmaseoseoseo on Wednesday, 12.14.11 @ 04:42am


I think the main reason they have overlooked Linda is because she turned her back on Rock in the 80s, came back briefly for her one album (the one with Aaron Neville for which she was two grammies) and the went on to other music for good. She basically says that she moved on to music that satisfied her more later on. But that doesn't take away from probably the most powerful beautiful voice that ever had a hit and she should be inducted. She was the first woman superstar who had the type of career mainly reserved for male singers. She was the first and only woman selling out stadiums. Her influence on country music is unmeasurable. Her brand of country rock IS country music today. Her omission from the hall is embarrassing.

Posted by Jonathan on Wednesday, 02.8.12 @ 15:22pm


Actually Janis Joplin was filling stadiums before she died.

Posted by astrodog on Wednesday, 02.8.12 @ 16:25pm


For those of you who have stated you're not familiar with all of her work, just read the wikipedia article on her. After doing that, if you think she does not belong, then I guess no other female should be there either. The fact she is not in at this late date de-legitimizes the R&R HOF for me.

Posted by BWA on Saturday, 02.11.12 @ 23:52pm


RRHOF is a joke, filled with elitist shit for brains snobs. You know the type....the "legend in their own minds", clickish, political, claiming to defend some lame, rock & roll avant garde rational. Yea, just like the type of losers here bashing Ronstadt.

Posted by Richard on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 01:26am


Wow, Richard, what a compelling case you make for Ronstadt's induction. I mean, with the tired cliches and name calling, you sure made a believer out of me. Tired cliches and name calling just do it for me every time.

I'm sure Linda would be proud to have you as an advocate.

*cliquish (BTW)

Posted by DarinRG on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 05:16am


Actually, the important point is that she's not part of that farce called the RRHOF, and that is a good thing. Seriously, given the characters who run it, why would anyone want to lower themselves. I'm an advocate for not having her in for the opossite reason. She's too good for that place. DarinRG,if the shoe fits, wear it! Jelousy's a bit ain't it.

Posted by Richard on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 13:31pm


Richard, the problem with the "(insert artist here) is too good for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame" argument is that it is a standard paralogism orchestrated by every embittered fan base of every artist currently not represented in the Hall of Fame (See the Rush, Moody Blues, Connie Francis, Boston, KISS, Chicago, Journey, etc, etc pages for more info).

The truth of the matter is, nobody is "too good" for the Hall of Fame. If Elvis Presley, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, etc are all in the Hall of Fame, it is a testament to the ultimate legitimacy of the institution. Just because you may not care for certain current Hall inductees or because some current Hall inductees have admittedly weak credentials or because there might be some people involved with the institution who are biased idiots (see Wenner, Marsh) does not negate the Hall's OVERALL credibility; to argue otherwise would merely result in a standard ad hominem.

Linda Ronstadt may very well get into the Hall one day, but to attempt to campaign for intentional exclusion because "she's too good for that place" not only reeks of condescension to the highest degree, it is just plain stupid, in fact it makes you sound exactly like the Hall of Snobs you seem to despise.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 15:02pm


Rolling Stone magazine is irrevelent. The RRHOF is irrevelant and has been from the very start. Both are run by a cesspool of people who certainly don't deserve an ounce of respect. I could care less who is in now or who gets in. It's the type of character, or lack there of, in the people who run the place and the overall lame creedo they have chosen to impliment and follow. Until such a time that people with class are put in charge, the whole thing is a joke. To be honest, I would suspect that Ronstadt would probably thumb her nose up at them if she was offered induction an she'd be correct in doing so. Being inducted in to the RRHOF is no high honor. Oh and yyes, when you see the sort of people involved with these organizations, it's perfectly correct to be condencending to them, because....again, they don't deserve an ounce of respect. When the RRHOF is run by those with class, honor, dignity, etc........then make your argument, otherwise mine is dead on correct.

Posted by Richard on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 17:00pm


If saying that Linda Ronstadt is too good for the RRHOF keeps her out, then who am I to argue. :)Like I said, I admire the passion of her fans.

Posted by astrodog on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 17:19pm


I don't see where you think I'm disagreeing with you, I was merely pointing out the main issue with a certain standard argument that is easily found around here.

Look, I'm not going to defend how the Hall is run as I have no interest in doing so. The idea of a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is what I'm defending, though such an institution would never be able to offer universal satisfaction. The very idea of a Hall of Fame for an art form just screams controversy.

"Rolling Stone magazine is irrelevant."

I agree.

"Both are run by a cesspool of people who certainly don't deserve an ounce of respect."

Never said otherwise, it's the artists who are the ones deserving of respect, not the Wenners and Marshs of the world.

"Being inducted in to the RRHOF is no high honor"

Many inductees, in addition to individuals who purchase the tickets seem to think otherwise.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 17:23pm


There's the problem. Considering who's involved in running the place, every day that the RRHOF stays open makes it all the more irrevelant. It doesn't matter who's in there. That's not the first, foremost or dire issue at hand. What is, is in fact a place that was created and operated by SCUM. Close the current one down since it's been created by flawed guidelines, politicial crap, etc...., get rid of the very filth running the place, open a new one up and start over with decent people, who don't follow some lame, avant garde mentality. Erase the place and those who created and run it. Start fresh with nothing but the most honest intentions, built and run by the most honest of people. Anything less is a joke.

Posted by Richard on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 17:52pm


I wouldn't accuse the people running the rnrhof of being too avant garde centric, they actually haven't inducted many alternative musicians. What I'd accuse them off is paying too much attention to inducting who they personally like and who is deserving.

also the people who run it are scum? bit harsh that. It's not as if they are the SS!

Posted by GFW on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 18:00pm


I also think that Rolling Stone is a horrible music magazine. Music journalism in the US has been generally poor, and it affects the music people get exposed to.
And I agree that there are too many petty political/ideological judgments that go into who gets inducted.
That being said, if you are going to have an institution like the RORHF than some level of discrimination has to occur. There is a case in favor of LR's induction, but there is also a case against her induction. If people are going to argue in her favor, then they have to acknowledge the possibility that there are also valid reasons against her induction. And they need to accept that a number of other artists who have not been inducted may have an equal if not stronger claim.
For whatever reason, Ms. Ronstadt has a very vocal fanbase in comparison to other artists. But in making her case, they constantly and annoyingly exaggerate her credentials. She was not the first female rock superstar, if the music she did can be classified as rock. Nor was she any sort of pioneer, all those claims notwithstanding. Simply put, there are reasons why she has never been nominated. It makes the unceasing effort to advocate for her seem curious.

Posted by astrodog on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 20:31pm


Astrodog, you talk a big game about her fans exageration of her career. You make your "justifications", but in the end, you're exaggerations and dismissive comments regard her are as guilty as those you claim. Also, if you agree that the RRHOF has the issues that it clearly does, then you need stop and ask yourself, why isn't it torn down and the people who are involved with it run out of town. That's the kind of response that needs to happen. Burn the place to the ground I say. It's a perfect example of what's wrong with this country.

Posted by Richard on Monday, 02.13.12 @ 14:19pm


Re: the post posted by Richard on Sunday, 02.12.12 @ 17:52pm

No arguments there, Richard.

"What I'd accuse them off is paying too much attention to inducting who they personally like and who is deserving." - GFW

Not sure about the second point, but absolutely on the first one.

"For whatever reason, Ms. Ronstadt has a very vocal fanbase in comparison to other artists." - Astrodog

I dunno, if this site is any indication it only proves that everyone from the most mediocre bands to lacklustre solo careers from former band frontmen have vocal (and annoying) fanbases. I wouldn't necessary say Linda Ronstadt has a more vocal fanbase than some of these but I admit I haven't read through all of the 350+ comments on this page so make of that what you will.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Monday, 02.13.12 @ 14:59pm


*necessarily

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Monday, 02.13.12 @ 15:00pm


I meant to say they induct who they like and NOT who is deserving.

Posted by GFW on Monday, 02.13.12 @ 15:55pm


You gotta also love Astrodog's use of the phrase "fair and balanced:, which in this day and age is used by everyone with an agenda to the point of ad nauseum. It doesn't mean jack squat anymore, and in the case of the RRHOF and the people involved, certainly amounts to ZIP!

Posted by Richard on Monday, 02.13.12 @ 16:30pm


Richard-I agree. If they won't induct such an original and innovative artist like Linda Ronstadt, they should burn the place to the ground and shoot everyone involved. And I take personal umbrage with the notion that I am in any way dismissive of Ms. Ronstadt. Quite the contrary. I just think she is a second rate covers artists whose inadquacies are so pronounced that her fans resort to laughable exaggeration when advocating on her behalf. But dismissive? Not at all.

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 02.14.12 @ 00:44am


Astrodog: Spoken like a true company man towing the line, with a side of satire or utter nonsense in this case. Well, you can go ahead and be full of piss and vinegar to your hearts delight. You can have your lack of taste, lack of judgement and lack of hearing too. You end up sounding and even more important being just another whiny snob, ever willing to throw out one lame excuse after another. One who fits perfectly into the RRHOF mold. Hell, you do it so well, Wenner could appoint you mini me! Wow, what can one say, another narrow minded individual who shovels BS for a living. How much does the RRHOF pay you to shil for them? One wonders.....

Posted by Richard on Tuesday, 02.14.12 @ 04:59am


Richard-Neither I nor this site has any affiliation with the RRHOF. And I do not have lack of judgment. Lack of taste? Maybe. :)

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 02.14.12 @ 09:41am


"original and innovative" is when The Clash and Talking Heads completely re-imagine "I fought the law" and "Take me to the River" helping to usher in whole new rock genre's as I wrote some time ago.Ronstadts covers innovated nothing.The only real case to make is in the realm of country music,which you should make at Future Country Legends if it exists.

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Wednesday, 02.15.12 @ 03:54am


She's done it all! Country, Rock, Classical. So talented and totally underestimated. This should be corrected soon so she doesn't miss the show. I would love to hear her perform.I think she was a very unique personality during a very male dominated era. Give her her dues.

Posted by Sthomas on Saturday, 02.18.12 @ 01:09am


As I stated in a post which seems to have been taken away, hahaha, perhaps because it hit too close to home: The RRHOF is an elitist country club run by elitist snobs. Best way to describe it to you "stars in the their eyes", blind cretins is taking an example from the movie Caddyshack. Judge Smails and the whole Bushwood country club thing. That pretty much raps it up right there. Bushwood a dump! Judge Smails proclaims......well the same can be said of the RRHOF.

Posted by richard on Wednesday, 02.22.12 @ 16:34pm


Trust me, it's not hitting too close to home. none of us have anything to do with the rnrhof, neither does this site.

hell, i doubt your comment is the worst thing thats been said on here, we've had some true rage on this site about it...

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 02.22.12 @ 16:39pm


This site is also home to the most pointless spam ever, every other week or so there's a spam attack that takes up all the room on the "Latest Comments" page whereby the said spammers only post random comments. It's all promptly cleared up within a day.

And yeah, nobody here is associated with the Hall if you want to see some serious Hall bashing read through the comments on the Jann Wenner page.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Wednesday, 02.22.12 @ 16:48pm


http://www.futurerocklegends.com/artist.php?artist_id=Jann_S._Wenner

For your convenience. It's actually a very entertaining thread.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Wednesday, 02.22.12 @ 16:49pm


Plus, the website's server had some issues not too long ago that erased a lot of posts. It's possible that yours was one of those unfortunate deletions.

But yeah, Ronstadt doesn't have the strongest case. I wouldn't say no, but it'd have to be a weak ballot for me to vote for her. (No, I'm not a voter anyway.)

Posted by Philip on Wednesday, 02.22.12 @ 17:13pm


Here's another good reason: So many acts should have been in on day one. I mean TONS, but instead you have this trickel every year, which is a joke and nothing more than a money making enterprise. So many should have been in on DAY ONE, it only further solidifies that the place and those around it are a joke. Rock and Roll is for everybody, it's big enough for everybody....not narrow minds. Have you ever watched even just a bit of those ceremonies......it's such a joke.

Posted by Richard on Thursday, 02.23.12 @ 01:53am


I cannot believe Linda is not in the RRHF. This is outrageous. In the 70's she was a top headliner as much as Jackson Browne and the Eagles were. She had one fantatstic album after another and had a voice like an angel and tons of sex appeal.
I betcha anyone who is posting here did not live through that time to know what it was like. Linda was a trail blazer.
From the Stone Poneys to Hasten Down the Wind and everything after Linda was a power house voice who added sex appeal and helped pioneer women in Rock. To deny her is to insult her and for that matter women as a whole.

Posted by LORI on Thursday, 03.8.12 @ 15:33pm


So all you need to get into the hall is being hot?

well i'm screwed, may as well give up on music now!

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 03.8.12 @ 16:48pm


Linda was the darling of Rolling Stone in the 70's with one glowing review after another and was named by that magazine as top female rock singer of the 70's.Why do people have this conception that Jann has a personal vendetta against her? Was there a fight between the two that I am not aware of?

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Saturday, 03.10.12 @ 21:51pm


I am sure we all hope she gets in!

Posted by Happy on Saturday, 03.10.12 @ 22:15pm


The fact Linda Ronstadt is not in and has never been nominated make me think there can not be much credibility to the Hall of Fame.

Posted by Peter on Friday, 04.13.12 @ 19:21pm


All you can do is say .......why is she not in?

Posted by happy on Monday, 04.16.12 @ 23:55pm


Linda was the darling of Rolling Stone in the 70's with one glowing review after another and was named by that magazine as top female rock singer of the 70's.Why do people have this conception that Jann has a personal vendetta against her? Was there a fight between the two that I am not aware of?

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Saturday, 03.10.12 @ 21:51pm

This only shows that Rolling Stone is not worthy os anybody's respect. Burn the place to the ground and start over. Be sure to ban anyone associated with the former RRHOF. Not because of Linda Ronstadt not being in there........ rather just because.

Posted by Richard on Tuesday, 07.3.12 @ 13:31pm


Linda being the darling of Rolling Stone in the 70's with one glowing review after another and named by that magazine as top female rock singer of the 70's only shows that Rolling Stone is not worthy os(?)anybody's respect. Burn the place to the ground and start over....Got it.

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Monday, 07.9.12 @ 04:03am


She deserves to be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, it doesn't matter if you like her music or not, I am not a huge fan of Ronstadt; however, her contribute to Rock n Roll music is immeasurable. Many of her biggest hits are actual Rock n Roll songs originally written by Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry or the Every Brother...also it is absolutely true, she paved the road to an army of female rockers. She is one of the biggest female artists in Rock history beyond the fact that someone loves her music or not. It is indeed strange that Ronstadt has not yet been inducted considering the importance of her name in Rock history.

Posted by Tony on Friday, 08.3.12 @ 10:41am


People need to get over the Cheryl Crow was influenced by Linda nonsense.As a very young teen Crow saw Linda on TV and said ""hey.. I want to sing too!!", which is all fine, but thats where it ends.Sheryl Crow's discography is not more than half filled with 10,20,and 30 year old cover material. And she did not emulate Lindas big band era career turn either.And for that matter,did anyone?

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Sunday, 09.30.12 @ 23:18pm


RR HOF Judge has now explained why Cheryl Crow cites Ronstadt as an influence. I would rather hear from Ms. Crow why she considers Ronstadt an influence. Not a revision of history by someone who holds an obvious bias, yet chooses the name "..Judge". Puleeeze.
And the fact that Ms. Crow chooses not to explore the big band era is irrelevant. It is obvious (to anyone without bias) that the Ronstadt influence comes from the country/rock genre.
RR HOF Judge, Please leave your biases aside when you post comments. Thanks in advance.

Posted by Mike on Saturday, 11.3.12 @ 23:54pm


Linda Ronstadt, Stevie Nicks (solo work), Heart, Pat Benatar, Joan Jett, Bette Midler, Diana Ross (solo), Donna Summer, Cher, Carole King (inducted only as a songwriter), the list goes. Why aren't these women already in the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame?

Regarding Linda Ronstadt, it amazes me that despite the fact that in 2012, she is still in the Top Ten best-selling female solo artists ever, there is still so much disrespect directed towards her and attempts to revise rock history so as to wipe her musical legacy out. Why the hostility?

Many artists already inducted didn't write their own music, and they made cover hits of others musicians' songs. Do you think that Aretha Franklin wrote her all of her own music? Or Madonna or Bonnie Raitt, or Led Zeppelin or U2? So why the double standard with Ronstadt?

And why have her detractors tried to white wash Ronstadt as a pop star when her most popular music was her Country and New Wave rock albums? It's bizarre.

And why the anger directed towards her for covering black artist's music and making these songs hits again, sometimes bigger hits than the original ones? And she was often as good as these artists or even better in some cases. No one complained about her covering white artists like Roy Orbison, Elvis Presley and Buddy Holly. So many other artists did the same thing.

And as far as her changing music genres, and having a chameleon career, David Bowie and Madonna were lauded for doing the same thing, but Ronstadt was portrayed as a dilettante. What's up with that?

Posted by get real on Sunday, 11.11.12 @ 10:20am


Linda Ronstadt should be in The Hall Of Fame. She is THE Queen of Rock, and THE Queen of Country for the entire decade of the 1970's. Rolling Stone magazine said so.....No performer, no group, sold more records than she did from 1971 through 1983. Not Elvis, not Bruce, the Stones, Fleetwood Mac, etc....She had more No.1 hits during that time than the above-mentioned legends. If THE King (Elvis), and THE Prince (Bruce) are in, why not THE Queen? She was THE first solo female performer to sell out a 100,000 seat stadium, and she did it consistently in the 1970's. So Hall of Fame, WTF is the problem???

Posted by Tony Fontane on Monday, 01.14.13 @ 15:32pm


Identifying oneself as a fan of an artist is an automatic admission of bias. This makes the accusation that I am biased the most laughable thing I have ever read on this entire website.. To paraphrase Captain Willard in Apocalypse Now, charging someone with bias in this place is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500.lol!

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Wednesday, 02.20.13 @ 19:39pm


I agree with all pro-Linda posters. If you don't like her or her music, that's fine, but obviously lots of people do. So where does anyone get off saying a top selling artist doesn't belong in the R&R Hall of Fame, etc.

And then, there is this, maybe it will change some minds!:

http://www.lazygirls.info/Linda_Ronstadt/Upskirt_qO53h0y

That might be my favorite picture of all-time!

Posted by Travis on Saturday, 03.2.13 @ 14:30pm


The Eagles want Linda Ronstadt inducted!

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 05.26.13 @ 10:48am


The Eagles were friends with her back in the day. Of course cronyism is what this game is about. The Pretenders got in their first year of eligibility because of Seymour Stein.

Posted by astrodog on Monday, 05.27.13 @ 18:01pm


I am astonished that this woman has been passed over for induction. This clearly has something to do with music politics & ratings. Because Linda has earnend it, deserves it and her induction is looooooong over due. Hall of Fame Voters WTF?

Posted by Angie on Thursday, 08.22.13 @ 03:04am


I am astonished that this woman has been passed over for induction. This clearly has something to do with music politics & ratings. Because Linda has earnend it, deserves it and her induction is looooooong over due. Hall of Fame Voters WTF?

Posted by Angie on Thursday, 08.22.13 @ 03:06am


Stone Poneys

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 08.24.13 @ 05:51am


the fact that linda ronstadt is not in the rock and roll hall of fame shows that the requirements for admission are both capricious and arbitrary. to think this woman's accomplishments have not already put her in the hall only diminishes the process by which people are elected. just a travesty.

Posted by bob on Saturday, 08.24.13 @ 21:34pm


let's all send her LOVE.. it's the best thing we can all do

Posted by Happy on Tuesday, 08.27.13 @ 16:26pm


I agree that Linda should be in. As part of her recent announcement about her having Parkinsons', she also stated she couldn't sing anymore. I'm not sure how clear she is on that, but we all know her condition will worsen as time passes.

So, as a quick motivator to get her in the Hall, why not nominate and eventually induct her all in one? Maybe she could try to belt out a couple tunes in April. Bottom line: why not now?

Posted by Jason Voigt on Wednesday, 09.4.13 @ 13:23pm


It is rumoured that Linda Ronstadt will finally be on the ballot of nominees for the 2014 Rock Hall inductees! Fingers crossed!

Posted by Tom Wesley on Monday, 10.14.13 @ 15:56pm


Where is your link to the rumor

Posted by Roy on Monday, 10.14.13 @ 16:01pm


Where you hear this from Tom?

Posted by Tim on Monday, 10.14.13 @ 16:10pm


I hope not. So many artists who are much more deserving.

Posted by astrodog on Monday, 10.14.13 @ 18:27pm


astrodog is such a troll.

Hes going around trying to put Ronstadt on blast. Go away and listen to your sorry ass Olivia Newton John albums.

Ronstadt will get in whether you like it or not. She has a strong fan base so you can keep going around on these forums and undermine her worthiness all you want but shes still getting in.

Posted by daftjustice on Wednesday, 10.16.13 @ 18:13pm


Somewhere Out There * Don't Know Much * All My Life * Blue Train

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 10.16.13 @ 20:35pm


The first four years of Adeles career introducing five original major hits puts Ronstadt in perspective and explain s why she is not inducted.

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Friday, 10.18.13 @ 17:50pm


The first four years of Adeles career introducing five original major hits puts Ronstadt in perspective and explain s why she is not inducted.

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Friday, 10.18.13 @ 19:04pm


I think she will get IN

Posted by Happy on Monday, 11.11.13 @ 12:35pm


She got in. She's an icon. The end.

Posted by Daftjustice on Wednesday, 12.18.13 @ 20:53pm


She's not an icon. Who is she? The only cultural icon that got in was KISS.

Linda Ronstadt is one of those stupid inductions you get when fan input is essentially meaningless.

Yeah, she did so much for rock than a ton of hard rock, noise, industrial, grind, punk and heavy metal acts...

The rest of the Big 4 after Metallica (Slayer, Anthrax and Megadeth)
Deep Purple
Pantera
Motorhead, Judas Priest and Iron Maiden
Napalm Death

On and on and on. The Hall inducts 30 Linda Ronstadts before it inducts 1 Slayer.
It is fraudulent. Fans would not get Linda Ronstadt in. They have to pressure people for a decade to get bands like KISS and Rush in.

Posted by Neckbeard on Friday, 12.20.13 @ 21:50pm


"The Hall inducts 30 Linda Ronstadts before it inducts 1 Slayer" Lindas first year of eligibility was the 1995 ceremony.She had to wait longer than any band you mentioned. Maybe you should actually learn about this first.

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Monday, 12.23.13 @ 00:34am


Finally, the END of the Philip-Astrodog-RR HOF judge "Degrade Linda Ronstadt Show" - time to pick up your marbles and go home boys. You were so wrong! Be sure to watch Linda Ronstadt immortalized this coming April into the Hall Of Fame.

Posted by Rob-ronstadtfanaz on Tuesday, 12.24.13 @ 02:13am


Man, all the regulars are just getting pwned around here these days. *rolls eyes*

Posted by DarinRG on Tuesday, 12.24.13 @ 04:07am


We'd best tread carefully, Darin.

Posted by GFW on Tuesday, 12.24.13 @ 07:48am


Yes, apparently I was wrong about Linda Ronstadt, even though I said I would like to see her get in at some point, and when I predicted her as making it this year? I was totally wrong about that. So glad someone was around to put me in my place.

Posted by Philip on Tuesday, 12.24.13 @ 11:54am


Don't worry,the HOF will eventually let her in,they are running out of people.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Wednesday, 04.14.10 @ 19:52pm

I was never wrong. The HOF did eventually let Linda in together with Kiss, Hall and Oats,and other artists who had to wait till they were running out of people.Having just a Nirvana induction would have been awkward.

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Sunday, 09.21.14 @ 13:40pm


Don't worry,the HOF will eventually let her in,they are running out of people.

Posted by RR HOF judge on Wednesday, 04.14.10 @ 19:52pm

I was never wrong. The HOF did eventually let Linda in together with Kiss, Hall and Oats,and other artists who had to wait till they were running out of people.Having just a Nirvana induction would have been awkward.

Posted by RR HOF Judge on Sunday, 09.21.14 @ 14:51pm


You know they are running out of acts to induct, especially given the narrow-mindedness of the voters, when they have to induct Ronstadt after 20 years of eligibility when she has never even been nominated before. (They still cannot nominate acts like ELO though).

And as predicted it accomplished nothing. Her meager legacy has evaporated into the dust. You can induct all the Ronstadts and Paul Butterfield Blues Bands you want and rock is so spent as a culturally relevant force and the R&RHF so increasingly marginalized that it means nothing. The brand has been tarnished into irrelevance. Even eight years ago this was a big deal. Now it is just another name in the mausoleum.

Posted by astrodog on Monday, 12.22.14 @ 09:04am


No. Ronstadt was one of the finest singers of the rock era, an important piece in the 1970s 'back-to-the-roots' revival of 50s and 60s music, and did a number of important Spanish language recordings.

The hall didn't 'run out of people to induct'; as Glenn Frey said at the ceremony this year, she should have gotten in with The Eagles and Fleetwood Mac in '98.

Posted by PopeCharming on Monday, 12.22.14 @ 09:39am


LOL. Astrodog is still seething a year after Linda's induction. Dude, go for therapy. You're a sad and bitter douchebag. I could have predicted you'd be here bitching a year ago and you'll be here a year from now still claiming Linda is not relevant. The fact that you can't get her off your mind speaks for itself. Go for therapy dude. LOL. I'll check in for your bitter comments every now and then and I'm sure you'll be here. You can't get Ronstadt out of your head. Why? Ask yourself! Ask your therapist to help you figure it out. LOL LOL LOL LOL Ha ha ha ha ha ha

Posted by Richie on Saturday, 02.21.15 @ 01:23am


Richie-Just noticed your comment. Ronstadt's induction was a travesty. It wasn't even close. She was a cover's artist. The whole point of waiting a period of years to determine whether an artist is worthy is precisely to measure their long term impact. Ronstadt doesn't have any. She was a popular singer in her time singing other people's songs (mostly prior hits), not taking a single risk, not moving music a single creative inch forward or even sideways, not having the slightest influence. We have reached the point now where these inductions are no longer relevant, where people are inducting pals and cronies to general indifference. But as an artist Ronstadt might as well not have existed at all. She was that much of a non-entity. And is still a non-entity after her laughable induction.

I think rock is spent as a culturally relevant force. It committed suicide. And the R&RHF now acts as a sort of old timer's museum. But that said so many bands were more worthy than Ronstadt. That will never change. A complete waste of an induction that accomplished nothing. At least she had to wait 25 years. It wasn't like she was overlooked. She just plainly never deserved it.

Posted by astrodog on Wednesday, 04.1.15 @ 23:21pm


Astrodog - You are the travestry. You are obsessed with BS criticism of Linda Ronstadt. For many she remains the greatest natural female vocalist of the rock and roll era. A seminal figure that brought steel guitar and powerful southwestern vocals to millions as well as a songwriters champion. Pull yer head out of Dave Marsh's arse and get a life that does not include a stalkers obsession with the beloved and forever impressive Linda Ronstadt. We arecall on to you

Posted by cowboy rockin' tonk on Thursday, 04.2.15 @ 17:02pm


I don't check in nearly as much as I used to, but it's nice to see you here again, Astrodog. I see you're still playing Lex Luthor to Ronstadt's Superman (or Supergirl, as the case may be).

Quick question - seeing as how you made it a point to respond on April Fool's Day, can any grain of truth be taken from your missive? Or are you just stringing out a few people for laughs?

Posted by Cheesecrop on Friday, 04.3.15 @ 10:12am


"Linda is now outside the pop music world, doing her thing. I don’t know if there will ever be another singer who impacts me like she does. She is truly at the top of the class, along with Emmylou Harris and Nicolette [Larson]. Some artists just have it. Like a painter who is great, you can’t say why. I have been so fortunate to have these friends.
I find it unbelievable that Linda is not in the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame. There is something wrong with that. She should have been inducted a long time ago. I would be honored to induct her."
— Neil Young on Linda Ronstadt in Waging Heavy Peace (via foreverneilyoung)

Posted by robtempe on Sunday, 05.21.17 @ 10:43am


Leave your comment:

Name:

Email:

Comments:


Security Question:

Which letter is Springsteen's band named after?
 

Note: Emails will not be visible or used in any way, but are required. Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Any content deemed inappropriate or offensive may be edited and/or deleted.

No HTML code is allowed.




This site is not affiliated with the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum.