Bubblegrunge and Countrygaze: Have Microgenres Gone Too Far?

North Carolina band Wednesday, a flagship of the “countrygaze” sound.

I, like so many others, struggle to find an acceptable answer when asked what I listen to. While I know the sounds, styles, and lyrics I love, defining them for someone is almost impossible. After a little research, Spotify prescribes me the genres “countrygaze” or “bubblegrunge”, which typically provide more confusion than clarity. These hyper-specific genres – while technically very descriptive –  can also be completely nonsensical or variably defined. There’s an argument both for and against niche definitions, along with which I’ll share the approach towards them that I’ve developed as a music-discusser.

To understand microgenres, it’s important to have a clear idea of what qualifies as one. The term microgenre is best understood as simply what its prefix implies – a genre that includes a very specific style or sound, often characteristics of only a small group of bands, a time period, or geographic region. The genre names tend to pull on existing terminology, adding prefixes or suffixes to broader genres or blending two together. It should be noted that media like film and literature can also have microgenres. “Countrygaze” (also termed "yallternative") is an example I encounter frequently. This microgenre loosely defines a blend of country influences - like pedal steel and down-to-earth lyrics - with shoegaze fuzz, dissonance, and laidback-ness. Flagships of this genre are songs like Wednesday’s cover of “Women Without Whisky” or Ovven’s “Abbreviated”. While, to me, these are prime examples of this genre, a quick Google search won’t include countrygaze in either of these bands genres, instead labeling them more broadly as alt-country. This presents one of the first issues with microgenres.

Wednesday's "One More Last One", a blend of country lap steel and shoegaze fuzz.

Microgenres, simply put, can be too micro. That is, they can be so specific or distinct that they can’t be used frequently. This infrequent use can cause them to fall out of general vocabulary and, in that sense, lose the intent of genre entirely. Genres are meant to be general descriptors that can clue anyone into what they’re about to hear. If the microgenre isn’t popular or widely used enough to mean something to most people, what do they really do?  Even Google doesn’t show these microgenres on pages of flagship bands. Who could reasonably be expected to understand their friend when they express their love for bubblegrunge? Microgenres, in their pursuit of identifying distinct sounds, fall out of general use and become less practical. At some point it becomes easier to define a sound with a slough of broader genres than to try and describe or find an applicable microgenre.

In this, we can find another issue with microgenres and music discourse as a whole: access. As someone who frequently discusses music, a big concern of mine is coming off as pretentious. Microgenres can alienate more casual listeners and reduce accessibility to music discourse. Frequent use of complex or niche terms could turn people away from music for fear of being out of their element. I feel that music listeners have an inherent responsibility to be approachable in regards to their music experience, with sharing music with friends, going to local shows, and engaging in music discussion being just a few of these responsibilities. Excessively niche music jargon can inhibit discussion and engagement with music.

This being said, there is a time and place for microgenres. Upon finding a band or sound you really enjoy, finding an existing microgenre that encompasses this sound can be a very valuable resource in finding more music. Microgenres allow people to narrow on the specific aspect of a song or artist that they enjoy, whether that be guitar tone, lyrical subject matter, or general emotion associated with the music. For someone who is aware of microgenre terminology, they can simplify music discussion and facilitate more clear communication about likes and dislikes in a sound.

I don’t think the middleground here is particularly nuanced or hard to see because microgenres can be a helpful tool in describing a certain sound. They offer much more distinction than classic genres can, and in this can be used to discover artists who share a sound you know you’ll like. With this, they can be too exacting. Any microgenre’s inherently small group to which it applies can make the term obscure or arcane. This lack of accessibility can make music discourse less effective and can isolate many listeners, even those who are heavily involved in the music world. The key to microgenres is understanding when and where to use them. They are likely best avoided in general conversation. In a music article or blog, they could be helpful if defined. They really shine in personal use or use with a search engine when trying to find a sound that’s just right. Microgenres are a helpful musical descriptor when used in an appropriate context.

- Bridger