Paul, you've done a terrific job and I've enjoyed listening to you piece. And thank you for including the score. I will have a listen and study more in-depth.
As for the sematic arguments, I agree with Guy Bacos that the real focus should be on Paul's work and not semantic and historical detail relating to the title (as interesting as they may be). It is enough for us today to try and simply enjoy a creation sucy as this and to help each other out with suggestions and ideas that might improve our craft. Symphonic poems have also been done by many other composers such as Dvorak and impressionisitic as they are, they can also simply be enjoyed for the wonderful and creatively inspired music. And this is how I look upon Paul's work.
Its quite a job to get beyond all of the technical details involved in composing and creating for samples in a hyper-critical world and for this I greatly applaude Paul's work, plus I whole-heartedly enjoyed it. We need more of these types of creative compositional efforts as well as focus on constructive criticism and inspiring rather than creating critical divisions.
As for constructive suggestions, I've shared some mixing thoughts privately with Paul that are somewhat of a reflection on some of the comments in this thread so I won't repeat them and he has numerous ideas to try out. However, despite the suggestions, I also really enjoyed it just the way it is. Its not always necessary to achive technical mixing perfection for a musical piece to simply be fun and enjoyable.
Thanks for sharing Paul!