These "genres" mostly fit very comfortably into their parent category. Even to the point that if you treat it as a strict history of the music, the majority of the subgenres are unnecessary.
It's poorly presented in this regard. It doesn't do a good job of delineating the music and the cultural history.
What is being taken as genre bashing is really tribalism and the subcultural awareness of the author. In contrast to it's failings as a strict musical history, it presents extremely well the cultural history around the music.
Comments
The thing is, it's not really genre bashing.
These "genres" mostly fit very comfortably into their parent category. Even to the point that if you treat it as a strict history of the music, the majority of the subgenres are unnecessary.
It's poorly presented in this regard. It doesn't do a good job of delineating the music and the cultural history.
What is being taken as genre bashing is really tribalism and the subcultural awareness of the author. In contrast to it's failings as a strict musical history, it presents extremely well the cultural history around the music.