K-pop songs are climbing the Billboard Hot Charts, and their artists are performing as headliner acts of global music festivals. The signs of K-pop’s global fame are everywhere. BTS, Blackpink, and Stray Kids are only some names on a long list of Korean stars whose fan base stretches across continents. As K-pop is gaining prominence in the international music scene, questions of how to define this new player have also emerged. Despite agencies’ strategizing to characterize K-pop as a new and unique music genre, critics argue that K-pop is not in itself a genre. K-pop, to the untrained eye, seems to merely be an impressive mix of already existing music genres—a simple repackaging even. But this would be an oversimplification of the complex genre that is K-pop.

How do we even begin to categorize what K-pop has become today? Are there even any performative art genres that can fully encompass the aesthetics of K-pop? Perhaps sonically, K-pop has not introduced anything new. There is no doubt, however, that as entertainment and performative art, K-pop plays by a separate set of rules that is deserving of its own category.

An Emphasis in Dancing at K-Pop’s Core

The obvious uniqueness of K-pop is the combination of singing and dancing. Artists of other genres, notably American Pop, have also danced on stage. But K-pop’s formula of mixing song with dance is fundamentally different. In the K-pop scene, dancing is part of the cake itself: singing and dancing are equally important. Artists do not just dance during the instrumental sections of their songs. Rather, they dance with full intensity while singing the verse, chorus, bridge, and all the other parts. This is not exclusive to the idol stage, as K-pop performances that stray outside the realm also incorporate dance into song. Artists such as IU, whose career was built around her vocal skills, make sure to include choreography that conveys her message. When fans await a comeback or a stage performance, it is this singing-and-dancing combination they are waiting for, as opposed to just the music on its own. This is comparable to other genres where dance is merely decoration, or the cherry on top of the cake. It’s a component that is sometimes introduced on-stage as a special addition, certainly not the element that is planned systematically as part of the song during the production stage. In essence, producers of K-pop do not consider dance as a separate element, a key feature that defines K-pop as its own genre, rather than a mere repackaging.

Even the Korean language reflects the significance of dancing in the Korean music industry. The term daen-seu-gasu, newly coined for K-pop, combines the English term “dance” and the Korean term “gasu,” which means singer. At first glance, daenseu-gasu may look similar to the English term “dance-pop artists,” but the performances these terms portray are completely different. Dance-pop artists perform to clubbing or disco music and their dances are deliberately easy for the audience to follow. In their performances, the singing and dancing parts are also clearly separated. K-pop daenseu-gasus are different—they move to impress. K-pop choreography is difficult to learn for those who are not familiar with dancing. This is made even more difficult by having to sing at the same time. The need for such a new term points towards how there hasn’t been this type of intense performance in the music industry before. Thus the dancing component of a K-pop performance is a defining and unique characteristic of the genre.

Visual Aesthetics at the Heart of K-Pop Artists’ Identity

The aesthetic rules surrounding K-pop also differentiate it from other types of performances or music genres. Each K-pop artist’s specific aesthetic tone is different—the empowering black and hot-pink aesthetics of Blackpink are different from the fearless tomboy aesthetics of LE SSERAFIM. The production and marketing team for each artist work hard to visually characterize their groups. This heavy focus on visual aesthetics is another defining characteristic of K-pop.
The most recent event that showcased the importance of visual aesthetics in K-pop is the feud between the producers of New Jeans and Illit. The conflict arose after Illit debuted with a similar aesthetic personality. Specifically, the concept and style of Illit and the music video of their title song Magnetic adopted a Y2K concept, a style which essentially forms New Jeans’ identity. The Y2K concept is a retro style that mimics and re-interprets the fashion and pop-culture trends of the early 2000s. The style has been at the forefront of New Jeans’ persona, to the extent that audiences of K-pop automatically associate Y2K characteristics with the girl group. The Y2K concept as New Jeans’ defining trait is precisely why Illit’s similar aesthetic burgeoned into a major issue; when the music video of Illit’s Magnetic was released, first-time viewers often commented that they thought it was New Jeans’ comeback.

Observing these photos, viewers’ confusion and criticism is understandable. In the first set of images, we can see how the two photos use the same idol placement, poses, camera angle, and faded filter that sets a nostalgic mood. The second set of photos are screenshots from the music video of New Jeans’ ASAP and ILLIT’s Magnetic. Again, we can see how the two groups have used extremely similar elements, including the arrangement and placement of the members, wide angle camera shot, and a retro filter that evokes a sense of dreaminess. Other uncanny resemblances to New Jeans have been pointed out, namely their makeup, costume design, and even performances. These have culminated into Min Hee-jin, head of New Jeans’ record label ADOR, openly calling out ILLIT for plagiarism.

The fact that a record label CEO reproached a girl group for similarities in their entire concept and performance highlights how visual aesthetics forms a vital part of the K-pop identity. In the music industry, artists are usually accused of plagiarism when new songs have eerily similar lyrics or chord progressions. This has been the norm because such musical elements are the standard for establishing boundaries among different songs and genres. Instances of plagiarism reports against a visual concept in its entirety have been scarce, if not non-existent, thus far because they have not been considered important. Entire visual and aesthetic concepts being called out as plagiarism by both the producers and the audience is not merely an outlier; rather, it highlights how visual aesthetics is a core element that defines K-pop.

Navigating the Musicality of K-pop

Perhaps the biggest controversy regarding K-pop is its place in the musical world as a genre. K-pop has especially been criticized as not being a musical genre, which requires a clear and unique set of musical characteristics or structures. These genre-defining characteristics are diverse, ranging from specific musical techniques to the instruments in use. Jazz, for example, is defined by its use of swing, syncopation, and blue chords, while country music is characterized by its use of folk instruments and lyrics. The issue critics bring up against K-pop is that it does not have these shared set of rules that define it as its own genre.
In the 1990s when the first K-pop groups debuted, perhaps K-pop could be defined by the language used or the nationality of the members, both of which were Korean. In the current scene, however, such characteristics are no longer attributes of K-pop. Many K-pop groups showcase various nationalities, some groups even having more foreign members than Korean ones. Some songs under the category of K-pop do not use Korean at all. The technical side offers no help in defining the musicality of K-pop—most songs are a fusion of already existing musical genres (hence the excessive, but not exactly baseless criticism that K-pop is merely a repackaging of different music genres).

But perhaps this mix-match of musical genres is what defines K-pop’s sonic ethos. Even from just looking at the official introduction of songs on music distribution platforms, the genre section lists all the different genres that the song has taken from. BTS’s IDOL, for instance, is listed as a genre mix of the South African Gqom genre, trap, and EDM, while Blackpink’s Shut Down is a mix of hip hop, classical, and trap. It is precisely this synergy of genres that sets K-pop apart from existing forms of music. K-pop producers do not randomly mix and match different genres; they inventively fuse genres and develop new twists so that the final product creates something better than just a sequence of all the genres used in the song. New Jeans’ OMG uses beats and elements from hip-hop, R&B, and UK garage. The mystical yet bouncy and bright atmosphere of the song, however, creates a familiar yet new sound that defy clear-cut categorization into the three genres it takes influence from. K-pop’s musical technique creates a sort of montage. Of course, using elements of other genres must be conducted with respect and acknowledgment that you are doing so, as to avoid appropriation. Nonetheless, K-pop’s trailblazing skill in fusing genres to create its own path provides enough reason to make it its defining musical feature that sets it apart from other genres.

As K-pop continues to expand across the globe, it may become more and more difficult to pinpoint exactly how it can be categorized. Should it even be encased within a musical genre, or could it be included in the broader category of performative art? With all its influences not only in music but in fashion, gaming, cosmetics, and more—how do we embody what the K-pop industry has become today? It may certainly be easier to simply categorize K-pop into an entire entertainment industry of its own. Given the sheer magnitude of K-pop, however, merely passing it off as a repackaging draws an insufficient picture of what it entails. The artistic, visual, and musical elements of K-pop deserve their own title.