Does having too many subgenres discredit art?

Question

there are probably 45+ different subgenres for metal alone, a good 30 for punk, about 8 or so _punk genres that have nothing to do with the punk movement or music (steampunk and cyberpunk are okay, but is there a need for a biopunk, fantasypunk, and retropunk?!), and many more little nit-picky subgenres.

Does this discredit the work that it's applied to?

I've noticed this mainly in music and literature, and it's kinda annoying

Answer 1

Yes.

Answer 2

Its human nature to apply taxonomies to the world so that we can compartmentalize and organize our surroundings.

What you see when you look at art in the late 20th/ early 21st century is the democratization of the tools and information required to both create and broadcast art. Asimov wrote things that could arguably fit in the "biopunk" genre but in his time were known simply as Sci-Fi or Fantasy.

You're right. Its annoying, especially because as with most things that humans gather around it can lead to elitism and arguments about which genre is superior. But the art still stands.

Punk culture encompasses distinct styles of music, ideologies, fashion, visual art, dance, literature, and film. If its the skin that the artist wishes to wrap their work in, cool.

Answer 3

Subgenres are created by critics and executives.  Artists just create art.  So, no, it doesn't discredit art, it discredits critics and executives.

.