Well I insist it does because the first thing anyone with enough intellectual humility to get beyond utter ignorance would be to look up who this guy everyone is talking about was instead of repeating ad nauseam that they don't know anything about him, so this can't be objectively relevant.

What information gives that to anyone except the empty personal feelings of someone who needs to post something just because? I see this a lot lately, and it's just frankly boring noise, of the whiny kind.

And then goes with name-dropping and stating that people who can talk about popular culture can't possibly know anything high-brow, which it even isn't in this case (high-brow might be for instance Adorno's book on Mahler to give an example I could barely follow). It's utter ignorance assuming that everyone you're prejudiced against for inane reasons can't possibly be perchance better educated than you are, could you imagine, oh the horror. There are several varieties of utter ignorance at play here IMO.

Gotcha. I only meant the sheer fact that he didn't know who he was, was not in itself anything that makes him ignorant. But yes, it was his response/reaction to discovering the story of this "mysterious" person that indeed took a surprising turn. Thanks for clarifying.