Yes, isn't it strange how, in the poetry world, it's the strong or the wimpy, not the average, that invites aggression? Does this reflect a lack of sex?

Does this knowledge - that rivalry, aggression, & acquisitive ambition drive birds (& poets) to sing - really dispel the mystery of song? Give us a leg up, put us "in the know"? Or does it just make us feel more sophisticated, disillusioned?

The question remains : why is song itself of such paramount value (such that all kinds of creatures - birds, fish, humans... - pursue it with such fervor)?

Harmony is enchantment.... no one knows why.

Schopenhauer on this topic (The World as Will and Representation, I):

In this state pure knowing comes to us, as it were, in order to deliver us from willing and its pressures. We follow, but only for a few moments; willing, desire, the recollection of our own personal aims, always tears us away again from peaceful contemplation; but again and again the next beautiful surroundings, in which pure, will-less knowledge presents itself to us, entice us away from willing. Therefore, in the song and in the lyrical mood, willings (the personal interest of our aims) and pure perception of the surroundings that present themselves are wonderfully blended with each other. Relations between the two are sought and imagined; the subjective mood, the affection of the will, imparts its colour to the perceived environment, and the environment imparts its own to the mood. The genuine song is the copy or impression of the whole of this mingled and divided state of mind.

Interesting choice of birds for illustration, the lyrebird being known for its pitch-perfect mimicry of other sounds: hardly an avant-garde avis!