I think you're still missing the point. The point is not to "not categorize", but that categorization is in and of itself, something that promotes closed-mindedness.
I do believe the original post was that someone wanted everyone else to refer to only "detroit or 313-oriented" techno, when they use the term "techno". This is a disrespect to anyone and everyone that is making what they calssify as "techno" that isn't 313-related or 313-sounding (to the person who stated this, no less). This subculture has tried to illiminate the close-mindedness of the genre pidgeon-holing through this "underground" attitude of anonymity, and the whole "faceless" approach, which DOES make it hard as hell to talk about (as was stated), because everyone begins to use their own descriptions etc. Also, almost all statements that go anything like "________ sucks", are genreally stated with lack of information, because an educated opionist would give a nice reason why it's not their bag. ;) This entire thread is the bore... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz (especially my posts...) dns. On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, john harvey wrote: > > "Detroit techno sucks" > > there is nothing wrong with this statement - he may have heard it all and > doesn't like detroit techno. the catagory of detroit techno is not > problematic - he is using it to tell us what kind of music he doesn't like. > if he doesn't really know what he is talking about then that's all to do > with his own ignorance. > > > "I only listen to Swedish techno" > > again so what? if people are narrow minded enough to say stupid things like > this then thats their tough sh*t. i personally hate swedish techno! > > > it's like saying we shouldn't catagarise tv programs so that people don't > get locked into just liking "sit-coms" or "science documentaries", or we > shouldn't classify films as being "horror" or "thriller". > > > > >
