maybe the reason the build your own map approach bothers me (even though I mostly enjoy doing it myself, on a day to day level) is that it seems so atomized. everyone with their own cute little idiosyncratic take on music history. but no reason to care about any of these takes. it’s interesting when you find someone with really unique yet convincing one, but that relies on there being a “common sense” view to rebel against.
I don't have anything against the post dubstep kids either. maybe a better example that blissblogger talks about in retromania is "record collection rock". bands like cul de sac have all your favorite bands as their influences and yet, while very good, seem to be missing something those influences had. (at least for me and I guess him--I'm sure they're someone's favorite band.) jim o'rourke never appealed to me for the same reason.
maybe with genres and scenes there's a "one level of removal" rule. you can make weird, unclassifiable music if it draws from an established scene, but not if you're drawing from other unclassifiable weirdos. that's what distinguishes cul de sac from their heroes beefheart and fahey, what makes them seem tepid by comparison. this relates to barty's point in the autecher haters thread about all the best music being "brimming with culture". you can still channel that magic when you're only one level away, but once the original culture is out of sight you can no longer access its power.
anways regardless of how you feel about cul de sac, I think it's obvious that a genre-less, scene-less future would lead to a lot more artists like them.