The problem with street as a genre is time: the 21st Century is the era of fudge; look at our politicians, just for starters, and in my opinion, photographers of the era are doing no better.
Not only does it, fudge, pervade the amateur world but the commercial one too. If you care to glance at the current fashion magazines, you see little but shiny, unreal representations of Photoshopped people; it's all about style over substance and the real beauty of a Shrimpton, a Suzie Parker is no longer relevant because the local dog can be turned into Cruftsian winner in the computer.
Does it matter? Yes, I believe that it does, because when everything can be faked then nothing has value. And likewise with photographic genre: if it is now perfectly acceptable to call something anything anyone wants to, everything becomes equally devalued because it is contaminated and eventually completely overpowered by the junk.
It is very difficult for most people to do people street well - I sure can't - and allowing any old shot with a street in the frame and some aimless person taking up space in it to be called street does a huge disservice to those who actually do have the talent to produce something with meaning, emotion and some impact.
But hey, in this egalitarian world, where even gender is no longer guaranteed its proper place in the scheme of things, why be surprised at anything?
