There are great players in the HOF. But in the case of Tharpe, I see a pretty negative side of the HOF process and everything having to do with it, which leads me to my question.

Julian Tharpe is deceased. Wouldn't it behoove the HOF folks to let bygones be bygones and basically forgive Tharpe of the things he did that ticked off the HOF board members. Do you think that the Steel Guitar Community as a whole would welcome such a gesture as a breath of fresh air into a stagnant situation that has gone on for 10 or 20 years. A dead man can't make up for his mistakes. Should he have to pay forever?

This has just bothered me for a while and I thought I would get some opinions from some of you and maybe something positive might come from this.

fred

------------------
The spirit be with you!
If it aint got a steel, it aint real

------------------
James R.Hall
MSA S10 & MSA D12

I've often wondered why, but it may have been because their only real focus was on their music, and everything else was either just an aside or was not important to them, and their life may not have been balanced with other things.

It's possible that every musician at some time in his (or her) journey through life, has made a decision as to whether music is more important than anything else in life, or whether it is just one important aspect of his life.

I'm making no judgements, but just thinking out loud as to why things are as they seem to be!

Scotty is one member and has just one vote as a Convention Board member. He does offer a place for the Board to meet yearly. He approves the expenditures for the awards given. He donates his time to participate in benefits that raise money for the yearly expenses, which this year were the highest of all time (nearly $6,000). That is the extent of Scotty's role on the Board.

Julian Tharpe has never been "formally" nominated. That requires documentation of his accomplishments and contributions as detailed on the HOF's web site. Yes, several people have sent in his name. A name is not enough. The Board receives many names yearly. When those who provide names are referred to the HOF's web site; the referring person is asked to provide the documentation. They are rarely heard from again.

Mr. Hatcher claims that "...no matter how great a musician you are/were, your musicianship can be totally negated by the HOF Board in light of what they consider mitigating factors dealing with your personality, demeanor, integrity and whatever else they can come up with...."

That statement is inaccurate. No person's musicianship is ever negated. It lives on. His use of the word "integrity" or the absence thereof, toward fellow steel guitarists, is rightfully considered as per the HOF's web site. Could that be what Mr. Hatcher is referring to? If so, perhaps he would like to enlighten us with that information rather than alluding to it.

Mr. Hatcher states, "Only Scotty can nominate a board member--hmmm."

That is not true. The HOF's web site states that "DeWitt Scott, who submits all potential Board members to existing Board members for approval" does not mean that he is solely responsible for nominating a new potential Board member. Anyone can nominate a Board member, either if they are or are not a Board member themselves. Scotty has always provided the names of potential new Board members, names that have come from other Board members. There have been individuals who have asked to become a Board member if the Board ever expands. The whole Board decides who will become a new member, not just Scotty. Over the years there have been several other Board members besides those who are currently members.

Mr. Hatcher states, "... basically this Scotty fellow has total control over who is on the board and basically who does or does not get into "his" hall of fame."

This is patently untrue. Scotty's role is restricted to the duties and responsibilities listed in the first paragraph above. If Mr. Hatcher has to refer to Scotty as "this Scotty fellow" he doesn't know Scotty as the majority of Forum members know him.

Mr. Hatcher states, "I say "his" because since the steel community is basically denied a vote then the HOF does not really mirror the sentiments of the overall steel players."

Not true whatsoever. Members of the steel guitar community have the most powerful vote of all: providing the nomination and documentation that justifies their nominee's candidacy. Most of the recent inductees have come through nominations provided by individuals outside the membership of the Convention Board.

Mr. Hatcher states, "There are great players in the HOF. But in the case of Tharpe, I see a pretty negative side of the HOF process and everything having to do with it, which leads me to my question."

Then nominate Tharpe and provide the documentation to justify his induction as Bob Lee recommended to you in this thread. If you know of a "negative side" to Tharpe's history with his fellow steel guitarists, then disarm it.

Mr. Hatcher stated, "Julian Tharpe is deceased. Wouldn't it behoove the HOF folks to let bygones be bygones and basically forgive Tharpe of the things he did that ticked off the HOF board members."

How about providing the details of what "bygones" should become "bygones." Mr. Hatcher appears to be aware of something that would cause Tharpe to come within the "acts and omissions" consideration as listed on the HOF's web site. Why not provide it instead of alluding to it?

[This message was edited by Tom Bradshaw on 02 November 2004 at 05:40 PM.]

Are you still a board member?

Scottys HOF site is where I got the info on the selection of the Board. If you go up to bObs post and click on it you will go to the site that has all the rules and such. On down into the copy is the statement that says Scotty submits ALL names. If that is not true then you call Scotty and tell him his charter on the web is wrong. I implore all to read this and tell me that this is not what this says. It does not say anything about the board submitting names to Scotty and then Scotty submiting them to the Board, it says that Scotty submits "ALL potential board members".

Also the charter has nothing to say about "formal" and "informal" nominations to the HOF. So you now come up with this two kinds of nominations to the HOF. The fact that Tharpe has never been voted on by the board is proof that he has NEVER been nominated which is what I said. I stand by my statement that Tharpe has NEVER been nominated.

Cutting to the chase, Julian Tharpe has NO chance of ever being inducted into the Scotty HOF because of what certain board members hold against him for things he did in the past. That also goes true for Reese Anderson, but this thread deals with Tharpe, so I will let you give your explanation to the entire steel community. With this attitude, I stick by my statement that no matter how great a player, you can be denied your rightful place among your peers and among some who are not your peers simply due to other circumstances that have NOTHING to do with your musicianship. Is this a HOF of musicians or of monks or other people who are perfect according to members of the board.

Tharpe is dead. There is no way he can EVER jump through the hoops that the board members demand he do, and the refusal to forgive his past discretions speaks volumes as to the character of the men who judge him in death as they judged him in life.

Tom Bradshaw--you tell the rest of the steel community what Julian Tharpe would have to do before you would vote on him being admitted to the Scotty HOF if and when his name is FORMALLY submitted for nomination.
You will have to give all the crap that is held against Tharpe, because I told the person on the Board that emailed me that I would keep our conversation confidential out of respect for him, whether or not I now think he deserves it or not. An honest person does this, not a dishonest person as you have accused me of being.

[This message was edited by Bill Hatcher on 03 November 2004 at 12:29 AM.]

Bill Hatcher, your presumptions and ignorance in regards to the processes of the HOF are almost on a level with your ability to take offence.

Dude, you go and write a submission, you research what a player has offered the community.
You offer examples of his teaching, or sessions, the albums, put them into a historical context, note the bands they worked with, if you do good you might even be able to pull out some cool quotes from people they've influenced, played with or even contemporaries.

I tell you what man, you bring some of that here, then you can do some talking.

Or, you can just get more indignant like others have before, and continue the process that keeps people from whatever recognition they deserve.

Dude, it's so simple. Don't gripe.. write.
If you can't do that, make some calls, network, and actually get the work done.
Make a proper nomination if you really want to get somewhere, not just with Julian, but anyone you think should be worth consideration.

I'm sure every year there's a bunch of useless emails that makes it to the Board, and it'll be the same old "why isn't blah-blah in here, it's a dirty shame..yadda-yadda.."

Do a search on the Forum under "Steel Players" . Just log in "Julian Tharpe" and see what comes back. If you do not know who he is then you will have a better idea.
Don't mind your post. I just see this as a long running injustice and decided to bring it to the forum in a way that might get some answers. Seems to bring out the best and the worst in folks, and possibly the truth.

------------------
Livin' in the Past and Future with a 12 string Mooney Universal tuning.

[This message was edited by Jerry Hayes on 03 November 2004 at 10:08 AM.]

------------------
Derby D-10 3+4 Les Paul Custom.

quote:

---

I think Mr. Bradshaw should resign his bias torkas and nominate b0b to take his place.

---

Scotty, Tom Bradshaw, Winnie Winston, they all made their significant contributions to the steel guitar world. There is no need for them to be jealous of anybody who is nominated for the HOF...

Kind Regards, Walter

www.lloydgreentribute.com
www.austriansteelguitar.at.tf

I would submit, in a heart beat, a nomination for Reece and Julian if I believed it would ever see the light of day. The board can always nominate from within itself.

Bob,

Since you weren't around, I'll try to fill you in on the impact of Julian and Reece. When Scotty and Tom were unknown folks with dreams of starting steel guitar oriented buisinesses, Julian, Reece, Jernigan, Emmons, Newman, and Chalker all gave their time, support, and shared their expertise to their earliest individual endeavors. Their combined, established musical credibility, playing dinky shows for little money, allowed Tom and Scotty the vehicle to gather a reputation, along with mailing lists to sell various ideas to the growing crowds these gentlemen attracted. Both Tom and Scotty had brilliant visions of the future and I salute their contributions, but without the help and credibility of those accepted giants in the music world, listed above, one can only speculate, whether or not, either could have realised that dream.

I'll wager that Anderson and Julian probably played more of the earliest steel shows than anyone else. Why should anyone have to remind them how much Julian's and Reece's musicality had an impact on the birth of the steel show and especially on two of its board members personal buisinesses. Add to that how orginal, explorative, and the fact that they both fathered the universal tunings, played on numerous sessions, inspired players, built guitars, taught and promoted the steel as upfront as anyone in steel history has and then maybe you can understand why this BS of submitting a nomination to those who owe Julian and Reece this debt of gratitude "The SGHOF Award" is so upsetting to me and many others that do remember the earliest days of steel shows, tablature, and mail order buisinesses and the way Reece and Julian promoted for them.

Paul

[This message was edited by Franklin on 03 November 2004 at 02:14 PM.]

------------------
Derby D-10 3+4 Les Paul Custom.

Everyone who was in the Steel Guitar World during the infancy of these steel shows are more than aware of the player contributions of such as Julian, Reece, Curley, Seymour, Joaquin, and too many others to mention. Without their interest and participation, there probably would be no SGHOF, large Steel Guitar events, etc. Just a thought, but one certainly has to admit their contributions were tremendous.

Just to set the record straight, there has been more than one 'FORMAL NOMINATION' letter submitted on both Julian and Reece, and there are lots of folks that know that.

And Tom I think that if everyone knew of your email to Richard Gonzales in years past, relative to the Julian Tharpe induction, that knowledge would probably heat this situation past the combustion point.

I don't think releasing that communication in public, however, would ever facilitate Julian's induction into the Hall. And after all that's what most of the Steel Player's intentions are. I also would hesitate in release of that document publicly because of the effect it might have on the Tharpe family. It does exist though and you know it.

Nuff said from this old man, but somehow past experience leads me to believe that this will not render a "fair" ending to this situation, but after all, "fair" (according to my old man) is just a "3rd grade word" where some things are concerned.

fred

------------------
The spirit be with you!
If it aint got a steel, it aint real

I don't really think there's any question of whether these guys should and/or deserve to be inducted into the H.O.F. that's pretty much a given. My question here would be, do they even care or want to be nominated? Julian can't answer that of course, but Reese and others???

The Steel Guitar Hall of Fame award is without question, one of the highest awards a fellow steel player could hope to achieve, and albeit honorable, I believe it's true value would lie within the heart of its recipient. If such an award requires pages of petitions, or brow beating a board of appointed officials to get it, what then would its true worth and value really be?

I have written a historical piece on someone who I'd like to see in the HOF. I was asked by another Forumite, and I jumped at the chance knowing that it would be a challenge, and that it was someone I'd love to see in the HOF.
The write-up was to put this player in a historical context, from their commercial peaks, their obscure treasures and their influence on the popular culture image of the steel guitar.

I personally did not get the nomination up and running, and although I'd like to leave them out of this for privacy, the person that did is part of this Forum and not a Board member.

I worked my butt off and I really appreciate the guy asking me to do it. He really drove this thing and for that I'm thankful.
However my the individual we helped nominate might not get in. And if he doesn't, I won't be here bitching about it and running down the reputation of other people.

I see references like "Scottys' Steel Guitar Hall of Fame," "this Scotty fellow has total control," "a breath of fresh air into a stagnant situation," "jump through the hoops," "this infamous board," "their outright arrogance in some of these matters," and "a bunch of average players making judgements on the brilliant ones," and I don't see anything constructive at all.

Re-nominate him if he's already had one, and this time do it better than the last good soul, you know each year there's nominations and people put forward real good cases.

I personally don't think Julian deserves to be in there before some others, but that's just because I think others have a more important historical context. It doesn't mean they'll get voted in that order.

If Reece and Julian have wronged someone and apologized, they should be in the HOF.
If they never did wrong, they should be in the HOF.

I hope that everyone is aware that ALL institutions are flawed, and tend to feed upon themselves, ..mostly because they are made up of people like us.

Educational, religious, political, scientific, musical, and other groups have people in them that do not like each other for some reason(s).

My physicist hero, Dr. Richard Feynman, turned down a seat on an "august body" for which others worked hard to try and be nominated. His reason was that the members of the august body spent most of it's time worrying about who was worthy to be in their presence and little time advancing it's art.

Pete Rose and the Baseball HOF comes to mind as a similarity to the SGHOF issue re certain people's qualifications and nominating commitee's biases. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" also comes to mind.

Hank Williams, Bob Wills, were kept off the Grand Ol' Opry because of the "druthers" of those in charge, ..nothing new under the sun.

Some of those in the SGHOF don't appeal to me as much as some that to my knowledge have never been nominated/considered. Some "great" pickers don't/didn't contribute much more than great picking, and some who are/were/could have been great pickers decided not to follow the road that lead to public attention and HOF's; same for teachers and builders.

There is not much except Performance, Personality, and Behavior, ..unless you want to include Appearance on which to decide a person's qualifications for consideration; how much weight should be put on each of these?

If perfection is the goal, then it would be a very empty HOF, and if perfection is/were required of the Board members, there would be noone to nominate or pass on any potential candidates.

I have my own SGHOF, ..it is in my head, and the two folk in question are installed therein for their contribution to the SG world, with no consideration of what else they did or did not do.

------------------

[This message was edited by ed packard on 04 November 2004 at 12:47 PM.]

"I'll never honor anyone who dishonors their fellow steel guitarists by victimizing them."
-- Jeff Newman

i continue to be amazed at the un-wavering conviction of those who think musicianship alone (or, in pete rose's case, baseball) justifies being honored with a place in a hall of fame.

sure, 'hall of fame' can be construed to mean 'here's where we keep the famous people'... or, it can mean "here are the exceptional standouts, whose grace, style, and integrity matched their contributions to the instrument and community".

i bet most of the 'tharpe/reece/whoever' conspiracy claimers aren't even familiar with most of the people who ARE in the SGHOF... nor do they know the reasons those folks were so honored.

fame isn't enough.

'nice' isn't enough.

the complete package is required... and the hof board is comprised of people WHO WERE THERE and KNEW THE FOLKS IN QUESTION PERSONALLY... they know FIRST HAND who did what to whom, and are BEST QUALIFIED to assess those nominated for the HOF... emotionally based and historically challenged dissenting opinions to the contrary.