/lit/ - Literature

>>10450601
>Why is hearing more abstract than seeing?
It's more a matter of sound used in music usually is not representational in the way images used in visual arts are.
You typically don't feel the way you do listening to music because the song is made out of reproductions of actual meaningful sounds you're familiar with e.g. the sound of your grandma cooking dinner or the sound of cars on the highway (it's certainly possible to make "music" like that, but more often than not this isn't what music is).
Instead, the sounds are inexplicably direct conduits of feeling despite the feelings not deriving from some real world referent. In contrast, even the most abstract art can still be very easily associated with real world events, and in fact that's what most people do when they look at visual art, they see colors and shapes and have thoughts about similarly shaped or colored things in the real world.
>>10450607
>That would be poetry since any audio/visual medium is intrinsically wired to be preferred (i.e. it takes immediate effect), while poetry is pure abstraction.
Are you posting from Bizarro 4chan?
Poetry is one of the least abstract arts there is, it contains words used as descriptions for events.
Also what "intrinsic wiring" are you talking about? Nobody can even rigorously define "music" any further than "organized sound," responses to music pretty clearly aren't just some automatic reflex or else there would be a lot more agreement in what music is.