What Music did Modernist Writers/Thinkers/Visual Artists listen to in the teens, twenties?

Short version of this question:

1. What kind of music did the progressive, challenging artists and thinkers of the teens and twenties listen to? -- People like woolf, joyce, hemingway, duchamp, the dadaists, the surrealists, etc.
I'm guessing stuff like cole porter, kurt weill, stravinsky, schoenberg? Anyone have direct evidence of musical faves of people like this?

2. Context of question, for anyone who gives a shit (you can totally skip all this as it's long and boring):

I was thinking today about people's responses to the new dylan album in a lot of the blogs I read (a lot of "fuck this mom and pop rock shit" type slags). How it follows the natural cycle of kids rejecting the music of their parents, no matter how relatable the new stuff might be to them if they were able to get past the generational chasm and really let the issues being addressed sink in.
After all, the backdrop of today's 20-somethings is similar to that of the mid/late 60s 20-somethings, in terms of anxiety about the future, mistrust of governmental policy domestically and abroad, etc-- and few people spoke more directly to those feelings than dylan at the time. Granted his new Dylan records don't give the listener quite a direct channel into these themes as in the past with a song like, say, "Masters of War" (either because dylan's lyrics aren't as protest-direct anymore, or because his withered vocal instrument doesn't allow him to project his lyrics with the same impact). But still, the lyrics of a lot of these new Dylan songs are *very* much a product of what's happening right now, and not "irrelevant" and "anachronistic" as I've seen posted. Though the musical framing might be of another era, the lyrics are often desperate, violent, apocalyptic and nasty in places -- even more so when you consider the battered mutter with which they're delivered.
But it doesn't matter ultimately. The sound and texture of new dylan records isn't modern, have absolutely nothing to do with the tastes of the day, and therefore any lyrical relevance the music has is easy to ignore for many. I can even see "freak-folk" devotees -- people whose idols, devendra newsom et al., wouldn't even exist if it weren't for dylan & the countless who've been influenced by him -- shrugging aside "Modern Times" with its too-clean production & breeze. Where's the gira-produced lo-fi crust? Where's the cocorosie ish trip-hop flirtation? It's just a vaudevillish blues-band sound, and texture and presentation alone are enough to turn most people off to what really matters with an artist like dylan: the lyrics.
So just as Dylanites in 1969 scoffed at their dads for digging sinatra and tony bennett, kids into bright eyes roll eyes at mom for bringing up dylan when she starts trying to bridge the gap and talk about hard rain's a-fallin.
But that's fucking crazy isn't it? I mean, don't kids of today have tons more to relate to in a figure like dylan than dylan-heads of the 60s had to relate to in a figure like sinatra? I mean sinatra was singing rodgers and hart and jerome kern (beautiful songs I love but which, let's face it, didn't often plumb the depths, or if they did, were delivered in a safe way that worked against depth-plumbing), so of course dylan fans weren't going to be able to relate. But bright eyes kids, shit, there's a whole lot for them to relate to in dylan, ochs, even seeger and guthrie if they're up for it.
But then I remember how fucking crazy sinatra was for kids growing up in the 40s (speaking in terms of what I've read about him ... I'm 28, my dad was barely born when sinatra was making people go nuts), how he caused *riots*.
Sinatra. Riots. This guy was basically the first teen idol.
Riots. Like elvis. Like even Dylan did in terms of the collective conscience of the youth of the 60s. Like Liszt setting pianos on fire. Like Paganini. Like stravinsky's rite of spring, and people tearing out chairs and going apeshit in paris upon first hearing it.
I'm not saying the kind of uproar sinatra caused in his day is equal to the conscience-revolution dylan helped bring about... but both impacted culture heavily, and both in their own way, no matter how impactful they seemed in their day, seem now fusty and irrelevant and... quaint.
It made me sort of feel for every parent from every generation who tries to connect with the future and say: "my generation went through shit too, and here are some artists who turned our world upside down, and opened new doors for us..." and have the succeeding generation be like: "umm, thanks, but that doesn't speak to me."
And of course it doesn't. Perhaps it shouldn't. Just like the person who feels like "Lost in Translation" (a movie I love) speaks directly to them probably isn't being spoken to by watching a talkie from the 20s. The emoting is totally different. the phrasing. the pace of dialogue. the music. It's all off. it's just another world -- it's alien in every sense of the world. not bad, just Other. Yes some art is universal & ageless -- but most, MUCH more than we want to admit, is distinctly borne of its time and distinctly remains entombed there.
I love dylan, elvis, sinatra, stravinsky, beethoven, and everyone else who ever shook up the shit of their day, but I also don't get angry anymore when people call them 'irrelevant' or mom/dad rock. They *need* to be irrelevant for new things to happen, they need to be shitted on and disregarded. If everyone went around loving everything that ever was revolutionary in the last 500 years then we'd never stop to look at our current condition, and how we can make contemporary music that speaks to people in a language they get.
Incidentally, modern times is decent but hardly warrants all the perfect-ten worshipful fellatio it's getting. Christ almighty, you bring up dylan and motherfuckers get relijun faster than an aztec village in the presence of smallpoxed rapist Spanish expeditionaries.

Anyway, if you read this far and forget what my original question was, I don't blame you. Go back up top to #1, and thanks.