Since you are talking about aristocracy, it is worth mentioning that since ancient times, along with the nobility, they have been in charge of financing, collecting and promoting art with purely aesthetic objectives. Then religious and political.
Today this is no longer necessary and the concepts of art are very varied and subjective, which is why I respect your point.
However, I feel a bit of contradiction in your words, assuming art as the great aristocrats of classism did, full of perfectionism.
Luckily for many these concepts have changed as man has evolved, in the end it is a result of himself.
Therefore, expression, experiences and communication with the viewer, who can be from any social sphere, are valued.
Although if some of its laws are put into practice, I don't think it is minimalism, I consider it too rustic and inerent to its own nature.
Thanks for commenting, I love debating and meeting people.🙏🏻❤️