It’s just rhythms and pitches really, in a sequence. But we don’t love patterns, a scale sounds boring. It’s the breaking of the patterns that sound good in music, but only in specific ways. Other ways sound discordant. What the duck is going on?
It’s just rhythms and pitches really, in a sequence. But we don’t love patterns, a scale sounds boring. It’s the breaking of the patterns that sound good in music, but only in specific ways. Other ways sound discordant. What the duck is going on?
Okay, but why do we love art of nature then? If you go further, some people love hyper-realistic art of nature, while others prefer surrealistic or abstractionist/minimalist stylized art of nature. If we talk about scale between absolute chaos and absolute order, art covers it all.
I think when we capture nature in a hyper-realistic way, the takeaway is control. We get to choose exactly what is included and what is not. It’s also about admiring the process that goes into it. We’re able to comprehend the work that went into making that possible. It also means that you get to stop time in the piece. You’re seeing that very specific part of reality that artist wanted you to see.
I agree those are some of possible motivations, but I also think there are countless other motivations for it in the wild. The “We get to choose exactly what is included and what is not” thing I personally think is more a “minimalism” mindset than realism, but that’s just my perspective. A lot of people who do realism, just go there and draw exactly what they see, or they have people pose for them. They ofc choose the scene and pose, but they don’t deliberately strip detail for artistic value like minimalists do, which means minimalists push way heavier into this “control what’s included and what not” territory.