What do you think of vulgarity and elegance in artistic creation?

This problem is too big. Art itself can't be summarized in one or two sentences. So far, I can't give a standard promise. What is art? I believe I asked such a question. What is art? There may be a standard commitment, but that can only show that this standard commitment is only a generalization of art, but it can't show that this is art. As for artistic creation, I think ... artistic creation is something based on the original art, and everything itself will have rules and regulations, just as you have to learn basic skills before learning any art course, and the basic operation of copying is to imitate predecessors ... then artistic creation is there. On the basis of the original, I have my own unique things. I study calligraphy. I take calligraphy as an example. The artistic creation mentioned in calligraphy means that on the basis of learning a certain family, people can see which family and what brushwork you have learned, but at the same time, your creative works must have their own unique style, which can be reflected in all aspects. For example, using a pen, such as the form of the work, the brushwork of the work, and the effect of the work. As for elegance and vulgarity, I understand that creative art with characteristics and no unique style also pays attention to a kind of taste and emotion. If you can't see a person's taste in a work, then the work is a failure. Such things will look tacky and elegant ... It is said that vulgarity is elegance, and everyone really appreciates any works of art. Everyone's appreciation angle is different because people's aesthetics are different, and they will think differently after seeing the works. Maybe I didn't distinguish between elegance and vulgarity in artistic creation in the end, but art is so charming and endless.