What I read is "everyone's tank should be an individual expression of art!" and then "but that art has to adhere to X parameters".
Personally, if someone wants blue gravel and pink plants and bubbling treasure chests, whatever. I am not yet convinced that a "garish" display like that really has any effect on the quality of life of the inhabitants, as long as the biologically important stuff is taken care of. Bubble/box/sponge filters can be perfectly adequate methods of filtration, and are often employed in breeding and growout tanks, usually setups that require optimal water parameters. Many of these tanks are also set up as barebottom, so a biologically diverse substrate, while perhaps beneficial, is certainly not required, and the needs it fulfills are easily satisfied in other ways.
While I see the point you are trying to make, and in part agree with you, I don't agree that driving the point home in the name of art or aesthetics makes any sense. By its very fundamental definition, art is subjective, and thus using that to paint a broad brush stroke between what is good and what is bad just doesn't make sense.
Rather than trying to convince people to take an artistic, aesthetic, or enriching approach to fishkeeping, I would rather spend my time helping those same fishkeepers understand how to satisfy the basic needs of the organisms under care, i.e. nitrogen cycle, fundamental photosynthesis, how things like ammonia and TDS levels actually affect a fish biologically. In my experience, I have found that once a fishkeeper gains that level of understanding, the "art" of the tank as you define it, follows on its own more often than not.
Well said!