''l'art pour l'art''

In search of some inspiration and London air i had a walk through the tate modern last weekend. Now, admittidly i am not a huge fan of art and my own critique is vague, yet still an opinion. I admire the tate itself as it is like no other gallery. Almost a playground. There is a certain disorder and lively presence, children run through oblivious to all, adults zig zagging from left to right. Its almost impossible to be rule breaking. But within these walls, in fact for this point im about to raise lets look at those walls of the 5th floor,"idea and object."
Now through walking around idea and object i walked out with a contrast of opinions, both insightful and awkward. The insighful event was coming accross the work of Jenny Holzer. This work consisted of a collage of A4 coloured paper, much like the shades and form of a post-it note. THe jaxtoposed A4 sheets filled a wall as big as a double decker bus, creating a powerful array of colours. The most interesting part was the message conveyed. As i am studying copy, this struck me as a very powerful example of how copy can be affective, aswell as stand alone. see examples:



SIMPLICITY OR BONE IDOL?
The question that left rotating in my mind is one i shall leave open and invited. Here are two images:
Image 1:

Image 2



The question that i asked myself is how image one, something so simple, even named black square with blue square. can have such a simple idea yet a huge role in the tate?? its not the fact of whether i like it or not? But just the idea of simplicity to its most singular form. On the othr hand image 2 offers the complete opposite dinamics. so my question is done something simple necessarily mean its easier or less work compared to say inage two whereby there is more detail??