I don’t know who’s more to blame for the whole “post” label – artists, music journalists or record labels – but it’s gotta stop. Here’s why.
The point of this following article/rant is not to criticize the music or the bands themselves. Just the concept of the term post-metal, and the thought process (or lack thereof) behind adopting it.
Okay, a band is post-metal. What does that actually mean? That they’re done playing metal and have completely moved on to other things? No. Apparently it means that there’s still traces of the (sub)genre that they’re supposedly “post” all over their music. So does it mean that they’ve progressed past the limitations of the genre? Sort of. Can’t we just call it progressive (insert subgenre) metal, then? Oh, heavens no.
To me, here’s how that logic would play out:
“So, what kind of subgenre would you say that you guys play?”
“You know, we’re really into black metal, so we decided to not really play that”
“Okay… and the reasoning behind that being…?”
“I guess as a band we kind of just decided that we were over the whole black metal thing from the very get-go.”
“Uh-huh. And why is that, do you think?”
“We didn’t wanna get tied down by genre restrictions, you know? We’re so much more than just this one subgenre.”
“So if you don’t play black metal, then what do you play?”
“Yes.”
“I see. To summarize then, how would you describe your sound?”
“Like we broke up with black metal but keep hooking up.”
“Okaaay. But when you don’t play black metal, what do you play?”
“I dunno. Bluegrass?”
“Alright then, why not just say that you play blackened bluegrass then? That has a nice ring t–“
“STOP TRYING TO PUT A LABEL ON US MAAAAAAN!”
And there’s the big irony in it for me. Is post-metal in essence not just a label assigned to bands who try to avoid being labeled? Or that music journalists are too lazy to try and pin down a more helpful subgenre description of?
A core problem with the term is – where does genre blending end and genre fluidity begin? Death metal with a black metal feel is blackened death metal. Hip-hop vocals and beats on top of distorted guitars is rap metal. Spoken-word shoegaze-y indie prog rock with some blast beats, tremolo riffs and hoarse screams sprinkled sparsely and unevenly across it is post-black metal. And definitely not experimental, or avantgarde, or progressive black metal.
So maybe we’re on to something here. Does “post-metal” only apply to bands who mostly operate outside the metal sphere, utilizing only a limited selection of genre traits in order to vaguely tie in to the metal genre? If that’s the case, why would metal be the defining factor of their genre description? Okay, so maybe it only applies to bands who used to be full-on metal, or at least come from that world as far as their musical sensibilities are concerned. I don’t actually think that’s accurate, but let’s just go with it.
If the point is that the band has moved beyond metal into a whole different genre, and they now stand with one foot in each camp, why should the fact that they’ve “left” metal be the key takeaway? Isn’t that like being in a poly relationship and insisting that you refer to one of your partners as your ex?
I suppose, from a band’s point of view, an explanation for still leaning on the metal genre when describing your sound could be that you’re trying to invite metal fans with you on your foray into outlandish musical territory, thereby broadening their horizons in the process.
This may, in fact, be as close as I get to accepting the premise of the term. BUT, I still can’t get over the fact that calling it “post” inarguably sounds like a claim to have grown out of the (sub)genre that the band once, wholeheartedly, let define it. And that the resulting sound they’ve adopted is somehow more evolved, more refined, more in vogue, than anything that’s still firmly rooted in metal will ever be from here on out.
Which brings me to my final objection to the term “post metal” that’s worth bringing up here. And that is the inherent implications in trying to define”what comes after” metal. As if the whole point is imagining a dystopian future where metal has ceased to exist, and this is all that we’re left with.
So, in my book, you’re either entertaining the idea of an expiry date to the genre, or you’re reducing metal to a “phase” that the band had to go through in order to achieve true hipst–, I mean, artistic enlightenment.
Instead, why not just give equal weight to each facet of the band’s sound. Embrace each side of the coin. Drop the “post” in favor of a simple “/” or two – list the band’s influences and picture them holding hands as you confidently display the schizophrenic nature of the music and dare fans of each realm to give it a try.
There it is. Am I talking complete nonsense? I would love to be challenged on this, cause I’m sure there’s some purportedly essential idea behind it that I just don’t get. In which case, feel free to educate me.
The Metal Dispatch 