The main cause of ignorance is a lack of knowledge, and for me, a lack of knowledge is inexcusable. Now I know it seems ill-willed to judge a person prematurely just because he or she doesn't know about something, it may be that it just didn't pique their interest. I myself will never hold my ground in an I.T convention, nor will I ever be able to fully discuss quantum radiation dissociative constants with, well, whoever uses them. But the key to success in this world is realising one is, and should be, capable of expanding one's horizons, and furthermore, will go about doing so. A quest for knowledge was what, after all, drove our predecessors to explore the world, and it is what will continue to add direction to humanity for as long as it may endure.

So it seems strange and in all honesty, a little pointless, seeing as how many people in this world seem to not want to expand beyond a certain comfort zone. It's almst as if people are scared of knowledge, scared to be informed and to know things. Or maybe they regard knowledge as pointless? I will not begin to count the number of times I've posed an innocent trivial statement only to be rebuffed with a cold and cruel 'So?' So? So you're an idiot. Do you not care to know and learn about something so you may discuss it in a sociable context? Are you small-minded enough to feel patronised by a simple factual statement? It seems a little ironic that in a world where holding social ground is a valuable commodity, most people don't even want to utilise what should be the best initiator of a conversation.

There are only two reasons I can put this down to. Firstly people somehow feel inadequate in the presence of knowledge, so paranoid are they about someone showing them up as being shallow and uninformed that they are ready to denigrate and typify those who actually know stuff as nerds, and laugh off all semblances of intellectualism. It is a measure of present-day society when people who know stuff are a group to be laughed at. Secondly poeple will always ask this question:"What's the point?" Simple question which we'll always find ourselves posing at one point or another. What's the point? What's the point of knowing this? Does it help me with anything? You see, that's the thing with people these days. Everybody is a mercenary to society, no one wants to know something unless they can see that it'll have a tangibly beneficial effect on their lives. It shows that there really is only one motivation to living these days: money. More and more money, so we can all buy big houses and expensive stuff to show off to all our friends, so we may bask in the glory that is their eternal envy and grudging respect, if it doesn't swell the bank account or pay the dividends, it's not worth knowing.

It is so like humans these days to put a 'point' on everything, that there is a point to learning one thing and no point in learning another. The fact that we are willing to denigrate one facet of knowledge in favour of another is testament to how material-driven the human species has become. We are willing to sacrifice what may have helped our ancestors survive for thousands of years in favour of a new bank plan, or how to manage a stock portfolio. Rather than preserving its legacy and making it important for people to have an appreciation of its finely tuned beauty, we let it all go to waste. This isn't to say it isn't important knowing how to manage a stock portfolio or balance the bank accounts -it is after all, what is most 'important' to most people- but to label one facet of information as worthless at the expense of another is unjustifiable. If you don't want to know about something that's your issue, but don't try and justify your lack of desire by labeling something as pointless. All knowledge is a bridge to truth, and this 'informational discrimination', if you like, is a sign of selfishness and a hallmark of someone possessing issues with his or her own existentiality.

First I was an inconsiderate sod who imposed ideals upon others, now I'm accused of being an arrogant self-absorbed offensive prat. Funny how the mindsets of society change over time...

Apparently the nadir of my latest diatribe was the point where I labeled myself an intellectual and underlined my confidence in that statement. I have received 'advice' to drop the statement from the last post and stop lording it over the shee...sorry, people who read my blog. Apparently this offends people and places designation on their intellectual status. My reply, emphatic as it should be, is no, I will NOT remove anything from anywhere, and I will NOT stop writing essays in which I make myself out to be better than other people. Not while I know first and foremost that I am right, and not when I know people are offended without truly trying to understand the point of my essays.

If people had truly read my rant on previous music, they'd discover that as far as respect goes, I have little for the decision of people who choose to actually defend and uphold mainstream music while at the same time decrying other forms of music which actually mean something, not the people themselves. But seeing as most of the people who came back to me had the manifested IQs of a goose, I reckon I might actually have to spell it out here for them, just to 'butter them up': I have respect for ALL humans and indeed, all living creatures. What I CANNOT respect is the decisions many people make, what they do with their lives, what causes they commit to, and the things they do to denigrate other people and their own dignity. There you have it, in simple terms understandable to all but the dumbest people.

The question is, really, how many people actually give a thought to anything that they do? The answer by my standards, is truthfully, not very much. These days few people actually give a damn about what they do or what they say, no one thinks about whether the cause they commit to is trivial, or pointless, or weakly based on a foundation of assumption or self-importance. It's a world where everybody thinks for themselves, for their own gain, that what they do is right, and with little or no research or any insight other than from the most trivial of sources and the shallowest points of view, will stick to that idea. Okay, that's not so bad. But closing your mind off from the ideas of others, for fear of ill-justifying your own truth? That's just indolence. Plain, stupid, close-minded indolence.

What's worse is that a lot of the ideas people reject are right, because either they take too much thinking, which is what a lot of people hate to do these days, I don't know why, or they detach from the mainstream. And to most people, they see no evil in the mainstream, why? Because it's the mainstream. Everybody follows it, nobody seems to find fault with it, no one seems to care, shouldn't be anything wrong with it. But to base your foundations of the mainstream on shallow ideals and little or no philosophy and simply because you have to do what other people are doing, what's so intelligent about that? Surely God or evolution, whichever ideal you uphold, gave you a large brain cortex for a reason? To think things through and provide logical reasoning? No, people just don't do that anymore. People are content on letting large parts of their brains lapse into misuse purely because they want to be seen to be in the crowd, be popular with the other mindless jellyfish they somehow contrive to want to associate with, and not have any defining personality or traits of their own.

I ask this then, is there any point in being popular if the people around you are exactly the same? Answer me that, just, take some time to reactivate those neurons that have collected dust over the last thirteen years, and think, think to yourself and think deeply, for the answer. When you're truly content with the truth of your resolution, come back and then label me as arrogant. If you agree with everything I just said and want to change yourself and give yourself some semblance of a well-constructed and proactive identity, fine. If you can still tell me, yes what you believe is true and it's worth upholding, fine with me too, but I'll tell you this, you're a sad person. Even worse, you're a jellyfish, because all you're content to do is to look like all the other colourless blobs of jelly that float around aimlessly on whatever current cares to take you and the others along on, without any defining personality or something that departs from the norm and that people can look upon and admire and say: "Yes, that is indeed different, and I can truly respect that."

I haven't seen that for a while. Few people have ever been able to show me that they can act and think differently from the rest of the world. Even fewer have shown me they're different, not just for the sake of it, but because they truly thought through their actions, and believed that there is a much bigger world than what most people care to associate with. Most importantly, these people aren't cowards, they KNOW what they're leaving behind is a pointless world which isn't worth upholding, and are content with continually expanding their knowledge and horizons, and in the process finding their own diverse niche in life. And who knows, maybe there are lots of people out there who think that way, but as far as that's concerned, I've rarely met anyone like that, and I respect people who are like this. These are the people who will always think things through before they do them, and will always aspire to improve every facet of their lives. They will have a thought for every idea, and an idea for every thought. They will understand what cause they commit to, and will always provide compelling reasons for supporting it rather than blase apathetic answers which dodge the reality of the situation and do nothing more than patronise my intelligence and make the person look like a retard. And if these people find that their reasons are wrong, they are willing to learn from an opposing point of view and develop their idea from there. It is after all said that that which does not kill makes one stronger. Now if only 4 billion people in the world can think the same way...

Haven't updated in a while. Been busy as usual, with the drag of assignments. I'll complain now, but I'll miss this in a few years. The fact I'm writing here at all is testament to the comparative easiness of current life as opposed to what I think worklife would be like. Not to mention the management of outside activities with whatever association I will be futurely associated with. Plus love life, or a wife and family, and parents. Maybe the lovelife is going a bit too far. Oh well...

Last week I levelled a lovely big gob of vitriol in the direction of modern music. The venom of my attack had people coming back to me and asking: "So what is it you DO like anyway?" I told them, and will continue to tell them, simply "Classical". "Oooh okay", people would say, in that tone that evokes a certain adequate-feeling superiority designed to tread all over my democratic choice which was after all, based on a sounder logic than any of them could ever muster to explain theirs, while t the same time sounding blatantly pitying and conversational. "Ooohhh classical. Yea that's good [As if I. Fuckwits.] I like classical too... [As if II. Fuckwits. Again...]" Oh really? Okay then, time for the exposé question. This is usually a variation of one or two questions:" Which composer do you listen to?/ Which is your favoured era?" The first one usually draws the inevitable. "Oh Beethoven. Definitely. And that guy, what's his name? [Insert long mouth-breathing pause] Bach. Oh and Mozart!" The second reponse usually goes along the lines of "Huh?? Composers had eras?"

OK, this has told me two things about you. First of all, you're a fuckwit, because you don't know anything, and don't want to even try, because you're cushy and close-minded and don't bother expanding your knowledge beyond what the teachers at school hammer into you from your textbooks. Secondly, you're a self-adequating ill-confident lowlife with no self esteem and either are patronisingly trying to decry my choice of music as an arrogant bourgeios illness, or desperately trying to portray yourself as being intellectually adequate for the sake of being 'social' in front of a person who has actually bothered to think his choice of music through due to your shallow inadequacies brought about by your aforementioned lack of knowledge. There are a few rare ndividuals who say they listen to Maxim or Bond. I usually let those slide even though Bond and Maxim are NOT classical music and have slapped their brand of 'pop' unto the world of true classical music like a falling jar of decompsed plum juice and bile; these people at least have tried to expose themselves a little to the world of classical music, though they definitely don't try anywhere near hard enough and don't really accord any degree of respect choicewise.

It sounds really harsh to typify the largesse of people, and to a point I could say I'm arrogant that way. It is however my point of view that unlike most feinters and pseudo-intellectuals I actually deserve to be. For one thing, I think I've read enough relatively speaking to be able to call myself intellectual. Secondly unlike many people I don't mind expanding my knowledge in any direction. My grandfather always had a saying "Dine with scholars and eat with vagabonds", he used to tell my Mom, and later me. In this spirit, knowing as much in as many fields as possible is vital, and as such I will try to expand my mind in any direction as is possible [except the I.T sector, somehow I just haven't had the gall to delve anywhere meaningful in that area. Which is a shame.] Thirdly, and this is most important, I actually think most of my decisions through. I am, if nothing else, practical when it comes to doing things. While I'll admit I've done my fair share of impractical things, I like to know that everything I do exists, is and was done for a purpose, and as far as my choice of music is concerned, there's no way anyone could ever practically defend an idolatory love for today's mainstream music, whilst I certainly can find concrete reasons for liking classical.

Okay, people ask, why do I like classical music so much then? Firstly, it, well most of it, has no lyrics. Some of the earlier works, especially Telemann's and Handel's, had a very Christian background, but for the most part I don't appreciate choral classical. Lyrics, for me, destroy music. They certainly have in today's music, which is why, while I'm willing to allow exceptions, alyrical music has no parallel. Firstly the tune is appreciated more, and secondly the song has a certain expressionism behind it which isn't interpreted for me, and instead allows for its own interpretation and for me to form in my own mind the scenario or storyline. This is the essence of music, and the reason it has accorded artistic status. Music these days is not art. It is devoid of interpretation and therefore has lost its essence, its soul.

When I listen to music, I don't like to be told what's going on or what's being talked about. I prefer to be able to imagine the scenario unfolding and interpreting with my own mind. Take Vivaldi's Four Seasons suite for instance. The most famous scene in Autumn is often entitled The Foxhunt. It is a pleasure allowing the scenario of the autumn hunt unfold with every note: the rhythmic trotting of the horses, the gunshots, the running dogs. Allegretto in Winter is an even more powerful interpretive piece. There is no concrete storyline in the music, and no two people I have asked who have listened to the piece can have the same interpretation of the song. One pictured a bear disturbed in the dark woods chasing the unfortunate intruder. Another imagined a strong blizzard and swirling winds. This to me, is true art, something everyone is allowed to form their own version of a story of.

Secondly, classical music often conveys influence from the culture which the composer is associated with. Many composers, whether through patriotic zeal or simply the love of a land and its culture, incorporate music from various regions. Ippolitov-Ivanov wrote about music from his Georgia homeland. Blas Galindo wrote El sones mariachi in tribute to the musicians of his native Mexico, whilst Moncayo did the same with Mexican folksongs in his immortal work Huapango. I appreciate probably more than many others the cultural resonance behind a music piece and the idea that it may be lost, or nearly lost, in history.

Lastly, classical music is a genre unto its own. Within it there are expressions of all types: of joy, of pain, of love, hope, despair. I bristle at the idea that most people who listen to classical music do so only for relaxation. It is true that with all the pseudo-power and heavy beats of today's music classical is often an outlet for people of less viable constitution to convalesce and kick back. However there is a dynamism and power in classical music, even the 'relaxing' ones, which people fail to notice. I affectionately call this the 'classical spirit'. For those people who seek specifics, classical spirit is undefinable and the result of a genuine immersion in the genre. It evokes the infinite, and the glory of true art. With all that in mind, knowing it is erroneous to overtly favour songs over so many equally glorious others, I have compiled a list of my top ten favourite classical pieces and suites.

1. Johann Strauss: The Beautiful Blue Danube. One of the most well-known and immortal pieces, by the Romantic master of waltz. The sweet flowing song embodies the quiet power of the majestic river beneath the languid grace.

2. Igor Stravinsky: The Rite of Spring: Ritual of the Pagans. Raw power and evocative of the contemporary view of an 'alternative classical'. Highly percussion based its irregular timing and breathless vocality are awe-inspiring and typify this composer's effort to change contemporary views of classical music. People fainted in the theatre, exchanged blows and walked out during its debut.

3. Piotr Tchaikovsky: 1812 Overture. An immortal piece, loved by New Years' Day pyromaniacs everywhere. The glory in the finale belies the political nature of the piece, and shows the ability of music to be used as a psychological tool; history buffs will note that the War of 1812 held litle glory for the French, of whom this song is in praise of.

4. Bedrich Smetana: Vltava [Die Moldau]. My Homeland. Another river-based piece. In this the composer conveyed his patriotic love for his native Bohemia, describing the beauty and grandeur of the land in smooth flowing overtones, in accordance with the river setting.

5. George Gershwin: Rhapsody in Blue. A truly contemporary piece dating from the 1920s, Rhapsody in Blue was the definitive answer to the melding of fledgeling jazz and classic instrumental. Anyone who has watched Fantasia 2000 will appreciate the city-style upbeat feel of the song; the piece was actually Gershwin's interpretation of the rain. This only affirms my belief in free intepretation, and I will not fail to note my impression with the smooth sophistication of the song.

6. Jose Pablo Moncayo: Huapango. Probably my definite favourite. The song conveys an almost stereotypical joy of the Mexican people, incorporating no less than three traditional folksongs. The pure splendour of the brass and percussions illustrates the vibrance and liveliness of traditional folk music, featuring 'duels' between brass and percussion instruments. Truly a gorgeous song to listen to.

7. Thomas Albinoni: Organ Concerto in A Minor. It can't be all happy. This song is for grey sunless days and funerals for loved ones. The true melancholy of the organ is offset by the accompanying violins; the mournful drawn out notes make this a darkly graceful piece. It has been accused of being boring. To me, it is anything but.

8. Georg Frederic Handel: The Harmonious Blacksmith. Scored for solo piano or harpsichord, this song is a demonstration of the players' pure virtuosity. The up-and-down scalar movements are truly impressive, as one imagines the fingers of the players running up and down the keys. A joy to listen to, and a sight better than the overused, overabused Flight of the Bumblebee [Nikolay Rimsky-Korsakov], which though admirable, is messy, disorganised and isn't solo.

9. Gustav Holst: Mars, The Bringer of War. Like the Rite of Spring, a song of power. One can never escape the unforgettable tempo of the drum. The song strongly evokes its warlike theme, with the sinister apprehensive tones and the constant beat of the drum. My second favourite behind Huapango.

10. Camille Saint-Saens: Danse Macabre. The legendary Danse Macabre was scored for piano by Franz Lizst, but the true beauty of the song can only be evoked in the full orchestral version. The song utilises the untamably scratchy sound of the fiddle backed up by other strings and percussion to tell story of the night when Death arose and played his fiddle while the dead danced. An immortal favourite of Saint-Saens -better known for his cheeky Carnival of the Animals- aficionados.