The genra of 'genras' is what's dead. Music journalists (and now bloggers) created the idea of popular music genras and they have now effectively killed it. Not to blame them, it's just what they do and it was enevitable- as new sounds emerged the rush to be the first to break the new sound/declare the old one dead intensified and coalesced with increasing rates of communication speed. The snake eating it's tail finally got so far down it's tail that it is now eating it's own mouth.
But it's OK, as anyone who lived on capitol hill in the eighties will no doubt tell you over and over again, the true heyday of grunge had passed by the time the True story of grunge was published. Crass was singing that punk was dead before the rest of the world even knew what punk was.
The idea of selling out is gone, we can enjoy good music without regard to how the enjoyment of a certain band defines our identities. Music is now truly post-modern. Sampling is a part of music making, pedals and processors can be hooked up to any instrument, synths can rock. People can and do like a variety of music and good bands always live beyond genra death.
The new challenge is to journalists to learn a new way of writing about music without relying on 'the next big thing'.

As far as that quote...if all the "grunge" acts had happened years apart from each other, no one might've lumped them together either. What more is a scene really than a bunch of like-minded artists making music at the same moment in time?

This was an insightful and thoughtful piece, and it's nice to see a paper give sufficient space to its Music editorial staff to make it possible, particularly given the local emphasis.

A few thoughts:

Although it's difficult to argue with the fact that technology and the 24-hour news cycle have accelerated the boom-bust aesthetic cycle, I think it's also very easy to have romantic notions about the pace of such things in the past. Seasonal musical fads that burned out quickly have been a core component of pop culture at least since the advent of Rock n' Roll. I think what's changed is largely the ways that the public (formerly critics) frame these trends. No one would have thought to call the Raiders' and Kingsmen's dueling versions of "Louie Louie" a genre, likewise with response songs such as "Hound Dog" v. "Bear Cat." They were just part of a musical dialogue, one whose practitioners and fans, I don't think, would ever have made claims of genre-hood.

I think that arguments about beach imagery and childhood nostalgia being somehow zeitgeisty are interesting, but I think Eric is right to attribute the proliferation of those themes and imagery to the rapid-fire exchange of music through the internet from band to band. Plus, beach songs and bands have been a core element of pop music DNA for decades, and a seasonal revival that brings that strand to the forefront during summertime is kind of appealing to me. On the other hand, I find very few of these "chillwave" bands to my taste, so many of them seeming like unabashed Animal Collective acolytes. I do really dig Best Coast, though.

One point of contention I have, however, is with the notion that the real-time exchange of aesthetic ideas that the internet facilitates (and which is so clearly illustrated by the critical grouping of "chillwave" bands if not necessarily their actual content) makes geography irrelevant. On the contrary, I think that the feedback loop of the online music media shines such a tightly focused spotlight on a handful of musical trends at any given moment that its effects in terms of homogenization are similar to, if rougher-edged than, those of major lables and payola-based radio in their heyday. While internet-based musical communities and groupings are almost inherently based on aesthetic similarities, location-based communities at their best are defined by containing a broad spectrum of stylistic viewpoints belonging to people who work, live and support one another because of sharing a city. Local communities are still the key to heterogeneity and innovation in music, I think. The internet can do good for that too, of course, don't get me wrong, but writers/bloggers (not speaking of Eric here) mistaking seasonal flavors for genres does not.

"If grunge were to happen today, it wouldn't need a bunch of bands living in the same city to reach critical mass; it would only require enough acts linked up online."

If this is actually true it is really sad. However, I don't believe it is true. Any music "scene" with any real soul gets that from people, fans and musicians, interacting physically. Then again, maybe I am just too old to see it any other way.

@2-
I agree with you on the Ariel Pink comparison. In fact, when I mentioned this to a friend who is really into this whole "chillwave" movement he checked Ariel Pink out and thought it was awesome. Of course, not a year ago I recall this same friend shutting of my car stereo because he thought Ariel Pink "sounded like garbage"...sigh. It's sad how much people place their aesthetic tastes these days in the hands of Pitchfork, Hipster Runoff, GvsB, and yes, The Stranger. I'm not saying this is a new phenomena--prior to the internet, people of various generations would head to Creem or NME or whatever for their musical aesthetics--just that it's vexing.

oh what up hargus

Who's in the picture? Are they just a couple of "whatev" dudes?

@13 and 14: supercoolstorybro

@5:
I'm totally naming a song 'Dancestab'. It'll be some next not-so-big shit too.

I'd never read Hipster Runoff before. Then I tried to read it. Then I vomited. EVERYWHERE. Thanks!