Of course, all three of these things will probably seem of little significance to me come next year. But do we put too much of an emphasis on the year in the sense of commercialization of our own lives? I suppose I should just shut up and make sure that I'm putting a proper value on my time. Yes, time aids maturation, but I feel as though I'll be alive for far longer than I could bear.

In my family, we've adopted the (I believe) native American tradition where you celebrate if you perceive you have grown as a person. Years are just digits, personality is real.

TMOW - that sounds like a great tradition. I do like birthdays though, it's a celebration of the life of the person, a time to honor them whether or not they have grown. Though of course we hope they do grow. But sometimes we have a rough year, and it's nice to still be loved despite being stuck. Mixing the two traditions would mean extra celebration though, and that can't be bad :-)

I have to admit, we're not puritans, and the last few years we also adopted the idea that an extra party a year never hurt anybody ;-)

It doesn't sound like you've developed any humility, which would be helpful, especially for the forum having less of these types of self-indulgent threads.

This symphony is going to be nuts if you're changing composition style halfway through.

You work 52 weeks and what do you get?
Another year older and deeper in debt.
Now St. Peter doncha call me cause I won't go.
I owe my soul to the company store.

@TMoW - I like celebrating unbirthdays. Party all year long and take a break on just one day a year. :-)

^ LOL

I like celebrating birth Days http://www.bonkworld.org/index.php?action=show&id=45

Unbirthdays are a Lewis Carrol reference.

@2WL: I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to come off as arrogant. I've strayed off of the forums in part because of comments like that, where you make bold assumptions based off of arbitrary statements made over the internet (not exactly the best place to determine someone's character). But I'll admit to being a tad bit conceited. I am generally smarter than most people and I have what I think to be great musical talent. But if any of you remember how old I am, you'll know that I'm far too young to say that I really know anything at all. An easy example for me to point to is my change in compositional style. When I started writing my symphony, I didn't know who Ives was, and I despised atonality. Since then, my taste has "matured" and I'm becoming more engrossed in it. My symphony is still a poorly collaborated mess of ideas that I am far too inexperience to be able to string together. In the meanwhile, though, I've taken to writing smaller pieces so that I can better find my true style. It's likely to change again, which is why I've set my symphony aside. I'd rather it take all my life to complete than to finish it in a hurry now and regret how it turned out. Partways, that's my intended message of this thread: knowing that tomorrow, I'll be one day older.

INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET INTERNET

@KA - You need to "discover" minimalism. Particularly Philip Glass. A good introduction to his work that will ease you into it is the soundtrack to The Hours. Then pick up his Heroes Symphony based on the work of David Bowie and Brian Eno. Finally you can get into his really minimalist stuff.

i would start off with koyaanisqatsi myself

google "philip glass torrent" and have a trippy rest of your week lol

I was trying to ease him into Glass and minimalism.

@Draug: I actually have listened to Glass, and really do appreciate minimalism. The only thing that goes with that, is that I have no talent for writing as such. I've tried to incorporate some 'minimalist motifs,' for lack of a better term (obviously my theory knowledge is limited here too), into my best work so far-my trumpet concerto. And when I say 'best,' I mean the only thing worth repairing rather than starting over completely with. But let me get back to the point by saying that I do respect the minimalist school, but as you've said, I probably should get into "discovering" it for myself. I'll definitely look more into that.

Working on small pieces is Bradbury's advice for aspiring writers, and I would assume that transfers over to writing music as well. But when you say you are smarter than most people (!), what types of intelligence are you referring to? Do you have intrapersonal intelligence, meaning you understand yourself more than the average person? Interpersonal intelligence, meaning you are really good with relationships? Do you have good spatial awareness...? Etc. --Or, are you just really good at reading and understanding the ideas of others, or at math/science, or...? ,,,and musical ability counts, for sure, as a type of intelligence.

Interesting question, Mujus. I generally refer to intelligence as one's ability to process and retain information. For the most part, if I see something more than once, I'll remember it for a very long time. While I may be limited in understanding theoretical process (like most of Chemistry and Physics), I can apply learned material very easily. I do have good spacial awareness, and I tend to have more, as you say it, intrapersonal intelligence. And, while I tend to get better grades in Math and Science than in English or History, I really enjoy English and History much more. But I think my intelligence more comes not only from my memory and adaptability, but my willingness to apply my ability to retain information so that I might better myself and increase in talent. I score very high on IQ tests and the like, but the value of such have begun to diminish in values. The biggest reason, being how you phrased your question. There is much to be considered in evaluating one's 'intelligence,' so I suppose that I have no right to say that I am smarter than most people. Sure, I know a bit more, but all that means is that I'm more likely to get into better colleges.
By the way, I love questions like this. It's always nice to set aside time to evaluate one's self and try to put it into words.

Oh, and I've heard the same for writing pieces. My Theory instructor applies the same philosophy. I started with harmonizing single phrases from Bach Chorales and since then, I've moved onto small Concertos. Starting with a symphony was the biggest mistake I could have made as a young composer, but I'm much more experienced now, and I'm considering starting on my first multiple movement work. What I love about it is that I now know what sounds good, and why it sounds good.

you might find some musical inspiration in the work of Keith Elam

here is an example of some of his work

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwSXfocnt48

When I started into theory, I started by taking existing pieces and arranging them for new instrumentation, then shifting their styles into something new (jazz to country, rock to classical, etc.) before starting my first original composition. I would suggest this approach to you as well. I remember my first piece being Vangelis' Chariots of Fire main theme done for marching band. The high school band had to play it and the other trombonists hated me for it. I arranged it where I could play it, but I was the lead trombone in the jazz band. It was a little high for them. That was when I learned that you need to remember your target performers when arranging music. :-)

http://pbfcomics.com/32/