Comment by jancsika

But AFAICT this author's prowess in the field you defined is no more or less than a mastery of that singular skill.

For the author to be a "Mozart" (as in the historical figure, not the myth[1]) you'd need to show a richness of the author's approaches that makes the reader aware of the challenges of and breadth of the field. Something like this:

* the brute force justification of monospaced text by creative word choices

Oops, wait...

* the brute force justification of monospaced text by creative word choices which follow a rhyming scheme

Oops, wait...

* the brute force justification of monospaced text by creative word choices which follow a (line-based and paragraph-based) rhyming scheme

Oops, wait...

* the brute force justification of monospaced text by creative word choices which follow an intricate rhyming scheme where certain paragraphs are mashups of archaic German verse and 1970s gospel lyrics

Oops, wait... there are also some patterns of words where the pattern is written twice, but punctuation was inserted in a seemingly arbitrary place so that I didn't even notice the repetition on the first reading. Something like, "One two three four one. Two three four." Except each sentence was grammatically and contextually correct. Mozart did stuff like that-- there's an example somewhere in the clarinet concerto but I can't remember where.

1: I mean, there's no law against using the mythical Mozart here. But I imagine we'd be trolled by HN'ers if we did that regularly with, say, von Neumann or Einstein.