Post #606747 by JONPAUL on Wed, Sep 14, 2011 12:30 PM

Why do people waste soooo much time trying to define what is NOT Tiki?
If the research into what IS Tiki is good enough, won't that be all the explanation necessary?
There's something inherently wrong with beginning a discussion with a negative--it just screams out for everyone to get into a fight.
John, is this just intended as a "stirring the pot" thread?
Is it based in a fun, tongue-in-cheek kind of attitude, or are you really being serious? And if so, why?
Is there really any validity or any kind of scholarly depth in re-opening that Tiki vs. Tiki Style vs. Hawaiiana etc., etc., etc. discussion?
Wasn't that dead horse beaten enough HERE???
Defining lines in the proverbial sand is fine, but why does every tiny little thing have to fit into some category?
Wouldn't time be better spent actually digging up some lost or buried information on something that's already been clearly established as Polynesian Pop?