It seems as if aggregation is unavoidable if one is offering content (or a product, or a service) in a complex marketplace with a wide variety of available choices.
Aggregation is really all about finding out what a content seeker (or buyer) is looking for, and then informing the content seeker of the choices available in that marketplace. You are looking for information? Type what you are looking for into Google and it will give you a list of possible information sources. You like Moldy Peaches? music-map dot com will give a list of bands you might also like. You are looking for peanut butter? The spreads aisle in your local SM will give you a wide variety of choices.
The more varied the choices in the marketplace, the more a content seeker needs help in navigating these choices, and the more value an aggregator is able to add (eg digital music marketplace).
Conversely, in a simple marketplace with few choices, a content seeker will find it easy to navigate and collect information on all available options without the aid of an aggretor, and therefore would go directly to the producer rather than via an aggregator.
So for example, if there were only 3 bands in the whole world, and each had only released 3 albums, there would only be 9 albums to know about and no use for an aggregator.
If the goal is to avoid aggregation, then one could offer something that is "uncategorizable". If it doesn't really fit with anything else, there would be no use in aggregating it with the choices in any existing marketplace.
Of course another question is whether aggregation is something to be avoided?
