I also find it very amusing that you blame me of pushing a dogmatic view of art when every third rate hack out there is making a career by perpetuating arbitrary bullsh*t ideals or morals they based off whatever semantic gimmick they could attach a name to it. Expressionism, serialism, minimalism, spectralism, post-modernism, clavicembalisticism ad infinitum. Woe is me for even daring to champion a universal ideal for art in the midst of this self indulgent mess.
You're the one targetting -isms in a negative and non-constructive way. Since every work of art seems to be required to walk on eggshells past your sensitive universalism, I think I'll do myself a favor and stop fueling your incurable gag reflex towards music that, frankly, I don't think you deserve to enjoy. D.H. Lawrence made an appropriate quote that went something along the lines of "not art for art's sake, but art for
my sake!" Unless you're some kind of diehard religious throwback or a communist, it should be fairly obvious that everything that means anything in music has something to do with
individuals coming up with their own ideas. If everything conformed to some universal mores and norms for artistic output than what about anything would be worth talking about. In the 20th century, more than ever before, this trend became apparant and composers no longer needed to fear excommunication, exile, or violent social backlash (although it was and is still happening here and there) for attempting to push their own self-proclaimed agendas. Besides, depending on the establishment had really begun to lose it's lustre after the world started destroying itself and losing it's solid foundations. When none of that is dependable, aspects of the self and the frontiers of the human brain are the most reliable source of inspiration. Balls to society's universal ideals. Most of those don't even bear a shred of existence anymore.
But of course, some people feel like the clock needs to be forced back and that individualism is threatening...so they attempt to rebuild the temple out of rubble. It's people with your bulls**t attitudes of universalism and idealism who ended up hocking garbage like socialist realism in the Eastern Bloc and who still seem to make it impossible to hear anything post-1920 at concert halls outside of major European cities. You target these "isms" as if the supporters of these trends are destroying everything about some nonsensical musical establishment that you feel you're a part of. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that most of the "isms" you're calling on don't really last very long as movements (sometimes they never even meet one another) and its usually a term coined by an *** music critic, a needling historian, or an overexcited composer who wants to feel like he/she's part of something. It would be relieving to stop hearing terms like post-modernism and expressionism thrown around with the same bull-in-a-chinashop fashion that politicians throw around words like terrorism and communism.
You really need to learn that finger-pointing and trash-talking doesn't somehow dignify you as being of a higher musical calling than people who are just trying to be creative in their own ways and offending your draconian standards. Sure, some folks during the twentieth century and still to this day throw a lot of muck around and show blatant disregard for tradition, but that is laughably far outside the norm. Lots more people spit poison and rot about the importance of tradition and the dangers of newer trends (however dangerous they aren't!!).
It might feel like the winning side, but that's probably just because this forum is filled with exactly what the OP pointed out:
vitriolic, anti-intellectual, Nazi, substandard-IQ [with] feces spewing out of the mouths
I hope music never satisfies you and brings fruition to your fruitless crusade.