Re: … why cinema loves the cello (Guardian Thu 30 Jul 2026 15.00 BST)
<b>Mimesis</b> Yes, it’s because both the cello’s range and its timbre are the closest to the human voice (both male and female). And it’s part of an even bigger effect, related to the expressiveness of music itself. The human voice itself has it most, in song and chorus, first, and then in instrumental music in general, and in music itself — which it in turn inherits from the biologically inherited expressiveness of vocalization for mammals and birds (but perhaps not, or less, for fish): a cry, a shriek, a moan, a plea: They are not learned signals and meanings, like red lights, green lights, or stop signs: they are evolved and encoded in our brains and hence our communication and feelings. And in musical expressiveness and movingness itself — hence, looping back, in song, opera, and, yes, film music sound-tracks accompanying, sometimes subtly mimicking the action and theme. If nature imitates art, music imitates the voice, and, second to the voice, the cello gets pride of place (and the double-reeds are next, not the too-close-to sinusoids of the clarinet family —which is why Bach loved the oboe, and perhaps the oboe da caccia and the oboe d’amore best.) One could move on to rhythm dance, motion and emotion itself…