3rd Millennium, 2nd Decade

Whenever I leave my computer (roaring old Mac OS X 2008 that it is) on for a long time unattended , and it has gone through all of its and my screen-savers, and the screen of the monitor has just gone black, at the very top, in little white letters, appears the (to-me) inscrutable and plaintive-sounding legend:  You have no Songs with Artwork in your ¡Tunes Library.  So I get online and ask it, please, to show me an example of a Song With Artwork--and it won't.  It's like it's embarrassed or something. And well, I can't help suspecting, it might be embarrassed.  The Great Divide we are looking at each other over, my computer and I, is, first of all, its dumb-ass definition of all music as "songs," which it takes from the post-literate generation which created it, and which it knows by no other name.   Even if my Mac Pro could be programmed to understand that songs are just a part of Music--though, to be sure, a very important part--Dancing is usually not singing (though it may have been 600 years ago), and the 1812 Overture is not a song.  And then there's the issue of attaching explanatory, or illustrative, or even somehow relevant, images to a "song"--which to my mind, and eye, and ear, is  exactly the ideological crux of conceptual misapprehension that makes Modern Dance  a heuristic pain in the ass, when it so cheaply and presumptuously attempts to "interpret" Mozart concertos and symphonies, while completely ignoring the tons of dance music that Mozart actually wrote for dancing to.  But hey, O my unconsciously barbaric young cryptomaths, I've got an idea of music that actually does have a sort of image that naturally goes with it--always has for me anyway:  The Largo Ma Non Tanto (2nd movement) of the Bach double violin concerto pairs nicely, I think, with images of the Ultra Deep Field taken by the Hubble Telescope.