"He was a giant of neoclassicism and writing original music in basically a sort of refurbished style to make his own style." what makes him different from Stravinsky or Ravel?
"He wrote many different types of works and forms, symphonies, concertos for many different instruments, operas, ballets etc." It is significant. Every good composer did that. But I'm not sure this renders a composer canonical though.
"He could imbue a type of character into his pieces that no one else could." Yes. What character did he produce that others could not? Orgiastic and full of frenzy for example his 1st violin concerto scherzo? Well Rite of Spring could do it. (that isn't to say that being able to reproduce a character that others happened to have done before reduces the value of his art).
"Combine lyricism with sarcasm, drama with soaring melodies". Question of interest: what actually makes his music sound, as many people put it, 'sarcastic'?
and i didn't even realise until i was like hang on i used the exact same harmonic gliss, open intervals & uncertain tonality
