Tina Turner

Not in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame

Eligible since: 1998 (The 1999 Induction Ceremony)

Previously Considered? Yes  what's this?


Essential Albums (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3Amazon CD
Private Dancer (1984)

Essential Songs (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3YouTube
What's Love Got to Do With It (1984)
Private Dancer (1984)

Tina Turner @ Wikipedia

Tina Turner Videos

Will Tina Turner be inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame?
"Musical excellence is the essential qualification for induction."
   

Comments

38 comments so far (post your own)

She's already in with Ike, no?

Posted by Casper on Thursday, 01.4.07 @ 18:35pm


Yes, but she deserves to be in as a solo artist. She's had a much more succesful career than the one she had with Ike.

Posted by Young on Friday, 03.9.07 @ 17:44pm


Her impact as a solo artist reaffirms that life and even the entertainment industry has a second chances. And focusing on the woman herself with her there would be not Janet, Madonna, Beyonce, etc. No other female act, with the exception of Cher, has toured as much as Tina in the latter stages of their career to greater sucess than when they were young. Compile a list of the top 10 most ifluential live performers in history, and if there is a female amongst them, it can only be Tina Turner, she was selling out football stadiums in the 80s, look at her concert in Rio or her What's Love Tour (which played to over 3.5 million people), she's simply the best.

Posted by Semaj on Tuesday, 03.13.07 @ 20:38pm


How in the world is she not already in???

WTF???

Posted by Moni3 on Saturday, 05.5.07 @ 20:10pm


I'm suprised that she isn't inducted,she realy deserves that,like a solo artist,not only with Ike

Posted by Goldie on Friday, 05.11.07 @ 03:13am


It's so stupid to vote here she is in.And her name is honored in Ike and TINA TURNER. The people who are in several times have only once their name in an inducted act

Posted by roméo on Sunday, 05.27.07 @ 10:02am


Tina is great I don't see ike why Her should be up before Tina

Posted by earman on Saturday, 08.9.08 @ 11:26am


I agree earman Ike was hot..!! He was what Tina wanta to be . She is great no doubt.. But Ike was at the birth of Rock and wrote the early foundations...

Posted by Mrxyz on Saturday, 08.9.08 @ 12:39pm


How could she not be inducted as a solo artist? Shes living ROCK & ROLL! Tina Turner is the whole reason why there IS a Rock Hall of Fame. She is the Queen of Rock & Roll!

Posted by Chris on Thursday, 08.14.08 @ 13:53pm


What's the Rock Hall rule when it comes to artists who have had careers as both, members of a duo and as a solo artist? Is it the same rule as the rule for artists who've have careers as band members and as solo artists? Those people can be inducted more than once (Eric Clapton).

Are duos treated the same way? Can Tina Turner be inducted again?

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 08.26.08 @ 12:09pm


I only know of one example, Roy. Paul Simon is inducted both as a solo artist and as a member of a duo. It is rare, but it has happened.

Posted by The_Claw on Tuesday, 08.26.08 @ 15:24pm


aw c'mon, Tina is already in. artists should not need to go in a 2nd or 3rd time as solos. there are a lot of great groups out there still waiting. e.g., the Pointer Sisters definitely should get a shot at consideration.

Posted by telarock on Tuesday, 10.7.08 @ 21:21pm


I think that Ike should be nominated He is one of the real "fathers of rock."..He had it going before Tina Turner even joined his band

Posted by mrxyz on Saturday, 01.31.09 @ 19:25pm


TINA should ofcourse be in as a solo arttist. She has eclipsed Ike and if Paul Simon can get in twice, then it unquestionable; frankly TINA should have been the first woman in 1986 to get inducted, so she should be in on her own, where she belongs, as soon as possible, to make up for that mistake.

Posted by Sir on Wednesday, 02.11.09 @ 06:40am


Brian...check this video out. It's what a true female rocker (and Hall of Famer) is all about;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvtWSGddBYA

No dancers, no gimmicks...didn't need 'em!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Thursday, 03.12.09 @ 21:43pm


you are correct on that one

Posted by Brian on Thursday, 03.12.09 @ 21:48pm


You would think that the Rock Hall would be in a mad rush to induct someone like Tina Turner for her solo career.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 11.17.10 @ 07:15am


at least induct her legs . . . :)

Posted by Michael on Tuesday, 02.15.11 @ 02:49am


ha ha this is all so funny. TINA TURNER worlds greatest "QUEEN OF ROCK AND ROLL" umm do you see any KING I didnt think so Ike is a piece of S*** and he may of led her to her career but reread on some details one of there first songs by the Kings of Rhythm wasn't even gonna get a chance until the producer heard the TINA TURNER version and instintly they wanted it!!!!!!!! MORE LIKE SHE MADE HIM!!

Posted by cgcg on Tuesday, 02.28.12 @ 09:54am


Take away Ike Turner and she would have had no career. He was her Sonny Bono. And she really didn't emerge commercially until 1984. Actually she tends to be overrated, but she is already in as Ike and Tina, so it's not exactly a pressing issue.

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 02.28.12 @ 12:33pm


Actually the more you look at it the more her status is a mystery. Ike and Tina only had one top 10 hit, the cover Proud Mary. Most of their songs were covers or songs written by other songwriters like Phil Spector. Tina's only writing credit of note was Nutbush City Limits, which peaked at No. 22. Her four solo albums in the 70s did nothing. When she actually broke through, with 1984's Private Dancer, she did not compose a single song. It was very much like Cher's 80s comeback: big label investment, heavy marketing, well produced videos, the best songwriters money could buy. Nor did she have anything to do with the song writing on any of her subsequent albums. I guess she is an R&B pioneer with Ike Turner, which has already been recognized. But I see no basis for any recognition beyond that, and the claim that she has some sort of important significance in rock history is exaggerated, albeit predictably.

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 02.28.12 @ 14:09pm


While I agree, Astrodog, that Tina Turner's case is questionable at best, but I think that you might be headed in the wrong direction here. There are plenty of deserving HOFers who never wrote their own tunes.

Posted by Chalkie on Tuesday, 02.28.12 @ 22:03pm


An artist's ability to create their own material is important. Here you had almost no songwriting plus a reliance on another's creative direction (Ike Turner) that rivals the girl groups' reliance on people like Phil Spector. But I was especially struck by how limited her impact was before Private Dancer, and to the extent that this breakthrough was manufactured as labels discovered their marketing muscle in the MTV era. The idea that she is one of the most important women in rock history is very, very questionable. Creatively? No. Historical impact? No. I guess I'm a stickler for the idea that you give people credit when they earn it. Her career simply doesn't measure up to her exaggerated reputation. That said, she was a good performer.

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 02.28.12 @ 23:03pm


An artist's ability to create their own material is important. Here you had almost no songwriting

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 02.28.12 @ 23:03pm
--------------------------------------------------
I've seen this line of thought come up several times on this site, & while I appreciate where it's leading, I always have a hard time truly accepting it.

I hope you don't mind if I remove this from the world of Ike & Tina, & shift it ever so slightly. I often hear the great argument between the Beatles & Elvis, in that the Beatles wrote their own material, & therefore they must be superior. Whenever folks bring this up, for instance, I point to the fact that the real argument then becomes one of who's writing the material. In this case, one of Elvis's songwriters is Otis Blackwell. This brings up the interesting argument of saying that two white English kids an ocean away in Liverpool could write rock songs better than an African American living in the States (at this time).

It is analogous to a show I saw yrs. ago, ranking baseball players. The show ranked Joe DiMaggio 11th, and Stan Musial 10th. The shows host came right out & stated that he defied any New Yorker to claim DiMaggio was better than Musial, & not acknowledge that being a New Yorker didn't have something to do w/it. I sometimes feel the same thing is happening in this instance as well, although it may be taking a diff. form (50's vs 60's artist, singles vs albums artist, & so forth).

I mention this because I believe I may be on Chalkie's side here. I value an artist writing their own material, but at the same time, there are occasions where context matters as well.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 02.29.12 @ 07:31am


I don't see why two white guys in liverpool can't write better rock songs than a balck guy in america. It's not as if good songwriting is dependent on your race or where you're born.

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 02.29.12 @ 12:34pm


I always say that being able to compose your own material is a factor, just not the only factor. All things being equal, when comparing musical artists those that wrote their own material have to be rated ahead of those who didn't. The important qualification is that (of course) circumstances are rarely completely equal, i,e., context matters. So you can't make any blanket assertions, a point I fully agree with. Cultural impact, historical context and importance, influence, etc. are also factors. To reference the famous example, Elvis was not a songwriter but his cultural and historical impact in the mid 50s is undeniable. That's why I don't have a problem ranking him ahead of contemporaries like Buddy Holly, Johnny Cash or Chuck Berry who did write their own material, although I personally may like these artists more.

The point I'm making about Tina Turner is precisely that I'm not seeing these other factors that can provide a sufficient context for the exalted status she is commonly given on the standard best-of lists. By the time she first recorded with Ike Turner (who can legitimately be called a pioneer), R&B/rock acts such as the Shirelles, the Crystals, the Chantels, the Supremes, the Marvelettes, the Bobbettes, the Chiffons, and (later) the Ronnettes had already hit and even topped the US charts. Nor did Ike and Tina Turner as an act have overwhelming chart success, really only achieving mainstream success in the late 60s when they opened for mainstream rock acts. (As compared to the Ronnettes who had opened for the Beatles years earlier). So you have an absence of historic importance/cultural impact (compare their impact to the Shirelles, Supremes or the Ronnettes), no overwhelming commercial success, and on top of that (in Tina Turner's case), very limited songwriting contributions. By the time she truly breaks through, with 1984's Private Dancer, contextual arguments no longer apply and it's perfectly fair to see it as big label mass marketing that parallels Cher's 80s comeback. So you add it all together and you have no overwhelming historical or cultural impact, limited commercial success before 1984 AND the absence of songwriting. I don't really have a problem with the induction of Ike and Tina Turner, a successful act that goes back to the early 60s. But the elevated status of Tina Turner herself is to me at least a bit mystifying. A good performer certainly who should be admired for her longevity. I just don't see her as one of the most important women in rock history.

Posted by astrodog on Wednesday, 02.29.12 @ 16:15pm


I don't see why two white guys in liverpool can't write better rock songs than a balck guy in america. It's not as if good songwriting is dependent on your race or where you're born.

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 02.29.12 @ 12:34pm
--------------------------------------------------
I know, this sounds a little nasty in some ways.

What I was getting at, at least contextually, was this: there's no model in England for the Beatles to follow when it came to rock & roll, at least until American artists of the 50's show up in some form (be it records, movies, even pictures).

There's no blues or country in England in the 50's. Everything is being received second-hand. This is notable, especially when you consider the Rock Hall's viewpoint regarding African-American artists in general. We're left w/the paradox of folks telling us the Beatles are #1, & using Elvis's lack of songwriting as a reason. Yet when it comes to those who are writing for him, at least one famous composer (Blackwell) IS African-American.

In the case of the Fab Four, however, this isn't suppose to matter...? methinks there's a flaw of sorts in this logic, the paradox of which has yet to have been worked out... (ha-ha).


As for Tina, I've no real issue regarding Astro's take on her. The argument for her alone is 50/50. I will say that, had she not already been inducted along w/Ike, the cumulative effect of her career would've easily opened the door. Now that the Hall has opened this option up, courtesy of the joint Faces/Small Faces induction, at least a few other artists have a chance. Certainly Paul Rodgrers just received a new lease on life, for those who think Bad Company alone didn't cut the mustard. Likewise, Chris Cornell has a chance under a joint Soundgarden/Audioslave combo (though I believe Bad Co. & Soundgarden should both be in on their own).

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 03.1.12 @ 07:09am


Some people got it some people don't. They only started making music once rock and roll appeared, so, the first Lennon-McCartney songs were written sometime around 57-58 when they had all heard rock and roll songs.

Plus tey didn't make a load of crap like elvis did later on, so that helps.

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 03.1.12 @ 11:38am


You would think that the Rock Hall would be in a mad rush to induct someone like Tina Turner for her solo career.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 02.5.13 @ 09:17am


Ike and Tina Turner were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1991. Tina Turner released 10 albums as a solo artist and she is considered the Queen of Rock, although most of her albums contain covers of other artists songs. Like Guns N' Roses who were basically inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame for one album, 1987's Appetite for Destruction, Tina Turner will be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame for her most important album, 1984's Private Dancer, and she should be inducted.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 07.30.13 @ 11:00am


Tina Turner

What's Love Got To Do With It * Better Be Good To Me * Private Dancer * Show Some Respect * We Don't Need Another Hero * One Of The Living * Typical Male * Two People * What You Get Is What You See * Break Every Rule * The Best * Steamy Windows * I Don't Wanna Fight * Why Must We Wait Until Tonight * GoldenEye

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 07.30.13 @ 11:17am


Tina Turner

What's Love Got To Do With It * Better Be Good To Me * Private Dancer * Show Some Respect * We Don't Need Another Hero * One Of The Living * It's Only Love * Typical Male * Two People * What You Get Is What You See * Break Every Rule * The Best * Steamy Windows * I Don't Wanna Fight * Why Must We Wait Until Tonight * GoldenEye

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 07.30.13 @ 18:46pm


I laughed out loud at the comment that Tina Turner shouldn't be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame because she didn't write her own material. OK, so let's take out Elvis, the Supremes, the Four Tops, the Temptations, Jackie Wilson, the Everly Brothers, etc. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame was launched to honor PERFORMERS. As such, Tina Turner is a nonpareil live act who has had a massive influence. The woman taught Jagger how to move on stage, was the inspiration for Beyonce and Rhianna who grew up pretending to be her and became the first female solo artist capable of selling out stadium shows. Big label hype? What a joke. Turner's comeback was a grassroots event that started in the U.K. with sympathetic producers who recognized her underappreciated talent. No one had to buy the songwriters. Bowie, Sting, Bono and the Edge, et al, offered songs to her. It's funny to me that GIANTS of the music industry see Tina Turner as a legendary artist, and piss ants like some of the commentators on here dismiss her. I'll conclude only by saying that Tina Turner's songs from the 80s and 90s continue to enjoy broad appeal and that Ike Turner's slapdash 50s productions are largely ignored by contemporary audiences. The three Ike and Tina songs that most people know are "Fool in Love," which is one of Tina's great vocals, "River Deep, Mountain High," which is essentially a Tina solo that Phil Spector had to credit to Ike and Tina, and "Proud Mary," which is such a great performance that even John Fogerty acknowledges that its really her song now.

Posted by Rtw30720 on Saturday, 06.14.14 @ 07:07am


I laughed out loud at the comment that Tina Turner shouldn't be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame because she didn't write her own material.

Posted by Rtw30720 on Saturday, 06.14.14 @ 07:07am

If you are talking about me, that's not what I said:

Ike and Tina Turner were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1991. Tina Turner released 10 albums as a solo artist and she is considered the Queen of Rock, although most of her albums contain covers of other artists songs. Like Guns N' Roses who were basically inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame for one album, 1987's Appetite for Destruction, Tina Turner will be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame for her most important album, 1984's Private Dancer, and she should be inducted.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 06.14.14 @ 20:21pm


I read the whole page now. Rtw30720 was commenting on something posted by astrodog.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 06.14.14 @ 20:27pm


"Like Guns N' Roses who were basically inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame for one album, 1987's Appetite for Destruction..."

Well, there were a couple obscure little albums called Use Your Illusion I & II that might have played a part in that, too.

Posted by DarinRG on Saturday, 06.14.14 @ 22:46pm


She was dubbed the Queen of Rock years after she left Ike...Why isn't she in as a solo????

Posted by mike sisco on Sunday, 10.5.14 @ 13:51pm


What can we do as fans to help to get her inducted as a solo? Can fans send a petition or vote?

Posted by Keith Gambill on Tuesday, 07.21.15 @ 09:12am


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.