Stevie Ray Vaughan

Here is a prime example of why the R&RHOF is a joke and why I'll never visit it. When you consider the LONG list of those who are in and do NOT belong, it shows their lack of credibility! Of course SRV belongs in!!

Elroy, what's in your water, man?

Nowhere in the article does it say SRV was better than Albert King. Nowhere does it say he was better than his influences.

That being said:

SRV WAS a better guitar player than Albert King. He WAS a better guitar player than Jimi Hendrix (not Jimmie Hendrix!) It has NOTHING to do with the color of his skin.

The fact that YOU think it does kind of shows where you're coming from...

Sad.

Stevie Ray Vaughan revitalized blues-rock in the 1980s, at a time when it had been pushed into the background, and he proved himself to be one of the greatest guitarists in rock. He was also discovered by John Hammond, one of the greatest talent spotters in American musical history (Count Basie, Bob Dylan, Aretha Franklin, and Bruce Springsteen, among many others).

However, and although SRV got better at record making before his untimely death, I don't think he rises to the level of a Hall of Famer. His songs were standard blues-rock vehicles, nothing special, even if the axe-slinging was extraordinar y. It is possible that he would have matured as a musical talent had he lived, which might have given him the influence, innovation, and legacy of a Hall of Famer, but we have to evaluate based on what was, not on what might have been.

Sean mentioned a number of similar artists as SRV. In the various "audits" of the Hall of Fame in my DDT Pop Flies column, I have already noted that Beck, Clapton solo, and ZZ Top should not have been inducted. SRV falls into that grouping for me. Freddie King is a different case. First, it's a head-scratch er that he was inducted as an "Early Influence" seeing that his career was contemporane ous with the rockers whom he influenced (hell, Grand Funk mentions his name in "We're An American Band"). But Freddie should have been inducted as a Performer, as was Albert King this year, although I don't think Albert was innovative or remarkable enough for Cleveland.

By the way, I'm saying this as a relative old-timer who still remembers the tremendous buzz I got when I first heard "Pride and Joy" bursting through my speakers three decades ago. And I'm proud to say that I got to see SRV live twice.

For me, liking someone's music and evaluating their legacy are two different qualities. As a fan, I love a good deal of SRV's stuff. As a critic and historian, I don't think that he rises to that level of the best the music has produced. (And for what it's worth, I feel the same way about Beck, Clapton (solo), and ZZ Top--love a lot of their stuff, don't think it's Hall-worthy.)

Music is such an emotional force that our feelings often override our critical thinking. The trick I think is to find the balance, and to consider this: If everyone is exceptional, then no one is, so what is the point of a Hall of Fame?

For the love of God, the RRHF is a farce, just look at ALL the garbage that's in there and look at bands like Jethro Tull, SRV, The Guess Who, YES...etc... not even considered.. .GFY RRH of Fame.

This one's bizarre. The Hall loves blues-rock to the point of putting fairly questionable acts like solo Eric Clapton and ZZ Top in (though I'd say they both barely deserved it). Guitarists who influenced blues-rock artists always have a chance of suddenly appearing on the ballot after long absences (Jeff Beck, Freddie King). Dying in one's prime tends to immortalize one's legend. He was commercially successful.. .You would think a guy like this would get in first ballot, which means they're probably waiting to induct some other previous guitar heroes (they probably waited on SRV to induct Jeff Beck first). Or this could be that the hall never likes more current acts from the '80s and always prefers to induct earlier acts from the '60s and '70s...