mundane aspects are more powerful when you look at them in such detail.
I'd describe "mundane aspects being looked at in detail" as introspection--be it introspection of the narrator or the main character. With such, though, there is no story, there is only depth.
I believe the best short stories strike a balance between depth (vertical; insights and thematic comparisons) and story movement (horizontal; actions, events, and characters doing things over time).
Sometimes Literary Fiction gets classified as boring when the introspective aspect of it outweighs the story movement.
On the other end of the spectrum, stories with mostly story movement but little introspection are sometimes called "shallow" or "genre-specific".
So, at least for me, something to remember is to try to strike a healthy balance between the two. Personally, I aim for a one-to-one ratio: 50% introspection and 50% story movement. That's just my approach, though, but I think it's something writers should consider when looking at their own scenes.