|
Main Dead Horse Genre Discussion
I don't want to sound Fan Wanky, but is Country really suited to this list? It's popular in its fanbase, and not much out, but it is the fourth largest genre in America, and I don't know what that bit about only one ever making mainstream charts, because there are a lot of artists who have. Garth Brooks is still the number one selling artist in history in the US. (Ish.)
Sorry if that sounded fanwanky, like I said.
RE: Genre removal
I noticed that nu-metal has been removed from the list. I'm fine with that, but I also noticed that deathcore is still on the list. Nu-metal is a lot closer to this trope than deathcore is, so if the latter gets kept, why not the former?
Bump, because my question still isn't being answered.
The basic definition of Dead Horse genre given on this page is:
A genre of music that music critics hate on principle.
There's more to it that's explained on the page, of course, but this is the basic definition. Several of the genres removed fit this criteria. And, as I pointed out previously, if deathcore gets kept on the list, so does nu-metal. It makes no sense to have deathcore and not nu-metal.
A genre of music that music critics hate on principle. Removed the potshot at Shinedown because they actually have fans and a good singer who doesn't sound generic, unlike Nickelback. Besides, Nickelback are infamous for being the worst post-grunge band. Shinedown's one of the few exceptions (Seether and Foo Fighters being two others I can name off the top of my head) rather than the rule though.
I'm a bit surprised that Progressive Rock is not on this list — but perhaps because someone else agrees with me that there's actually no such thing as "Progressive Rock" as a genre somehow separate from Rock. I've yet to see any evidence that Prog is anything other than a blanket label which British rag New Musical Express slapped on all new Rock acts from roughly 1968 to 1976. The three "distinctive" features of Prog strike me as not at all distinctive; weird time-signatures (the Dave Brubeck Quartet did that in 1964, and some, such as 3/4 and 5/4, aren't regarded as at all strange in classical music), very long songs (songs have always been of many different lengths; I've never heard of The Doors being called "prog", yet Riders on the Storm is over 7 minutes, L.A. Woman over 10 minutes, and The End nearly 12 minutes; The Beatles definitely aren't prog, but Helter Skelter as recorded was about 27 minutes long) and classical influences (composers have always borrowed or stolen from other composers; it's virtually a rule of songwriting that a song about a funfair, amusement park or circus has to include the main riff from Fucik's Entry of the Gladiators).
I'm wondering if Polka should be on this list. It's not really a mainstream style of music, but it's often portrayed in media as music that Straw Losers listen to.
I am incredibly surprised electronic music of any kind isn't on here. If you say you like electronic music, or especially the word of death *gasp* techno, a lot of people immediately assume you have a horrible taste in music, as electronic music isn't "real music". Some may even go so far as to say you must be some kind of meth addict or do tons of XTC if you say you like rave music, because of course all people who love electronic music must be constantly on drugs. Very common with the older generation, though slightly averted with genres like house and, more recently, dubstep.
Contemporary R'n'B as 'Rich and Beautiful' circa 2005 is indeed mocked by every critic out there. But I think there should be added an exception for a new breed of R&B that began to appear in 2011, from artists like The Weeknd, who was praised very highly by the critics.