Sorry I didn't make my link into a hyper-link; I suppose it was too much asking everybody to copy-paste it on their browser's address bar...
Don't confuse style and passion with crude emotion. I'm not angry; why on earth would I be angry just because you don't share my views on anything? I don't even know you. Conversely, you didn't even get the coffee related jocular attitude, I don't expect you to get classical music either. I addressed most of your points directly and counter-argued disarmingly, if aphoristically. You're the one offering generalities and dismissals (like you said, 'Rank' tactics). Just because you have no idea what I'm talking about doesn't mean you are being attacked personally or that I am unaware of other kinds of music around me. You are right in that we share different aesthetics. Mine involve what is generally (i.e. globally) regarded as high and timeless art, yours remain to take their proper place in history in time, and you are quick (and tired really) to dismiss mine, without offering any names of people you admire more than the classical musicians so that I'm actually afforded a direct comparison with Bach, Beethoven and the like. Your pathetic example of your street-musician friend "handling four independent [mostly periodic I would assume] parts with his limbs" should not be compared to Bruckner my ignorant debater, but to Geoffrey Douglas Madge playing Xenakis' piano concerto 'Synaphai', which presents the pianist with TEN independent staves - one for each of his fingers, don't forget the two feet for pedalling, don't forget the large-scale structuring/interpreting in the performance while listening to the orchestra at the same time, and have a look at the score if you ever wish to see something that is really complex. Your notion about African rhythms (or Indian) being more complex than Western ones is 100 years-old. And could your friend handle Bruckner's 10-voice counterpoint or huge developmental structures - as opposed to just banging away incessantly, creating a momentary mood instead of a monu-mental timeless work? You seem to think that because I revere this kind of masterpiece I am unable to enjoy a street improvised, skilful performance. I just don't confuse or mis-weigh the artistic merits of one and the other. Hypothetically, The king of Botswana and the king of France are both kings; however...
I agree about the compromises of the equal-tempered system and the even more problematic tuning and resonance of the piano. Isn't it ironic how the compromised well-tempered system and badly tuned and resounding piano have been the platforms for so much incredibly beautiful music? You have to take the good with the bad. As far as the classical melodies being paltry most of the time for you, please link me to some melodies you admire so that I can scratch the Mozartian, Chopinian, Wagnerian, Tchaikovskyan, Puccinian, Scriabinian, Prokofievian, etc. glue off my ears. Please enlighten me!
Did I deify Williams here? I believe I actually said that he can't even begin to compare with Prokofiev and that group. Unless you were bothered by my placing him about a zillion places above Zimmer and the beat-mongers. However, you are wrong about him as well. He is not just an arranger. Just an arranger could not have composed The Raiders, Star Wars, or Superman. He is very inventive in his mannerism and he has made the 'Fanfare' genre his own, even when compared with the classics!
But you're right; the article isn't for you. Perhaps one day.... I.R.C.A.M. scoring pictures? I don't know for sure but I doubt it. If you're interested in electronic music and sound design and never heard of I.R.C.A.M., I regret to inform you that you know 'effing'-all about that genre as well... Also, I am not inconsistent in my view that modern-day academia is problematic; its main problem is that it has eschewed proper elitism for a mutant substitute, which tries to accommodate pop-cultural aesthetics (really!...) by dressing them and infusing them with pseudo-academic methodologies and jargon (effectively stripping away their vitality and spontaneity), while trying in vein to hold on to the view that the Modernist and Post-Modernist aesthetics have any relevance whatsoever in the serious world anymore, both being very dated products of 'reactionary' mentalities and ill-interpreted Marxist tenets. Academia has forgotten that they should be the fosters, scrutinizers and cataloguers of creative work; not the instigators and regulators of it.
As far as what in your estimation constitutes a 'Composer' this century... Perhaps you need to inform all current publishers of dictionaries as well as university faculties. They seem to be unaware of your definition.
P.S.: As far as I know Civilization is currently in its 5th incarnation. You seem to be a little behind the times there old boy - compared to your views on music I mean... I also hate decaf! Would there be cognac in the house by any chance?