By: el_lupino

One reason that I think the label(s) have met with some distaste and feel a little embarrassing is that they are the product of something very different from past "scenes." The was coined by a journalist (Simon Reynolds) or at least gained traction with his usage, and he was grouping a number of bands (Bark Psychosis, Tortoise, etc.) by qualities he found in the music, rather than their geography, their relationships, how they made the music, or any number of other things the musicians would actually care about. Contrast that with The Memphis Sound, or the Dischord bands, or a hundred other such examples. "Post-rock" was something that those bands, whatever their affinities might have been, never got to own or develop themselves. Someone they didn't know (or barely knew) slapped a label on them from afar, which has to feel like being boxed in or reduced to a simplistic version of some aspects of what you're trying to do. But it's in print in Mojo and Spin and the NME and now it's a question everyone asks you every time, despite it still being this abstract idea that you have no stake in and no control over. And then come the imitators. How could anyone with any sense not want to put some distance between themselves and that? How does it not end up being condescending? I see bloggers sometimes who seem to just be trawling through myspace and bandcamp, looking for any artist with three things in common and declaring it a microgenre. (Witch house! PsyTrap!)