/lit/ - Literature

>>11282131
Mozart's music artistically is far closer to bird singing, cricket chirping, wave crashing, etc., than a modern "field recording" of these things. You know why? Because just as birds are making sounds that are naturally pleasing to them, and so are crickets, and waves are doing what they do by nature - so Mozart makes music that is naturally pleasing to men. Men naturally hum/whistle tunes and Mozart essentially takes that natural human capacity to its highest level.
Modern field recordings, on the other hand, are just mummified corpses of natural sounds and so fall far shorter in imitating the natural rhythms and beauty of nature than Mozart's music.

Look at a Raphael painting. Do you know why it is better than a hyper-realist painting or a photograph? Because he includes what is essential to the image and removes what is inessential in order reveal the essence of the object while still maintaining its likeness. Whereas an abstract painting like Kandinsky will try to paint the essence of thing while being totally removed from its likeness/appearance.