As the ‘buzz’ last week in the classisphere about a ‘contentious’ issue demonstrated, trying to define things / oneself / your music / your ‘scene’ / your ‘bandsemble’ can get touchy. Maybe u like 2 talk about it. Maybe u want ppl to ‘shut the eff up’ and #stoptalkingandmakeshit.
Maybe there’s no reason to define this ‘movement.’ Maybe this music ‘defies categorization’ / is ‘genre-bending.’ Did anybody write music b4 now that broke ‘the rules’? Would Milton Babbitt have written different music if nobody called him a serialist? Sucks 2 b pigeonholed.
Do you need an iconic b&w photo to be an -ist? Maybe Philip Glass doesn’t mind being a minimalist because he was a ‘pioneer’ of that genre. If u founded a genre would u want a say in what that genre was named? Have we run out of new genres?
How many times can u add post- 2 a genre? Maybe we should have pre- genres like movie prequels. Even though u know the outcome, u imagine a new genre based on being ‘historically informed.’ Do u wish u could see the future so u would know what kind of music we r creating?
What do u call a genre ‘informed’ and ‘influenced’ by multiple genres? <— That wasn't a joke. What would be a good punchline if that was a joke? Oh, do u want to know what I think? There's no reason 2 define this 'movement.' ‘Shut the eff up.’ #stoptalkingandmakeshit.
Filed in: New Music.
Rules are made to be broken… genres are made to be bent.