yea, i think using these genre names should be used purely in a
descriptive (functional) sense. Describing the nature of the thing
instead of actually defining what it is.
What if all genre names were changed from nouns to verbs so not to
classify the artist, but the work ... trip hoppy, acid jazzy. That way
on some subtle level people might not think Krush IS acid jazz... or
Krush IS trip hop. He can't possibly be both "things" at once right? I
think the big problem is when people start to take these words too
seriously and get caught up in silly arguments about completely abstract
concepts. Have you ever heard Dj Krush? If no, certain hip hop trip hop
discussions might be able to paint you a picture, so cool. But once you
hear him, why bother with debating what to call him after the fact?
Bottom line of my 2¢ is, Classifications are necessary. Don't try and
hold onto them too hard.
hope i presented the age old discussion in a slightly new way. I never
participated in the threads before, i swear! =)
cya,
argo