To be understood.

'The progression of a painters work, as it travels in time from point to point, will be toward clarity. Toward the elimination of all obstacles between the painter and the idea, and between the idea and the observer. As examples of such obstacles, I give (among others) memory, history and geometry, which are swamps of generalisation and from [which] one might pull out parodies of ideas (which are ghosts) but never an idea itself. To Achieve this clarity is, inevitably, to be understood'

- Rothko, 1949.

The peculiarities of the cultural form in question.

Did a bit of reading, here are some bits that seemed important to me to note down and a little explanation about why I think they are. Quotes are taken from Beyond Piety - Critical Essays on the Visual Arts, 1986-1993, Chapter 4, Seriousness and Difficulty in Art Criticism.

'We have reached an historical moment where the innocent feel that it is reasonable to expect access to cultural production without effort, and specifically without engaging the peculiarities of the cultural form in question.'

'...that morality which would oblige it's audience to assume responsibility for itself, to be citizens instead of consumers.'

People seem unaware that effort is required to absorb the richness that can be taken from some art. People need to go to the artwork instead of expecting it to deliver all it has immediately and directly to them. A certain level of engagement is required, and a certain kind of understanding that the beauty of art, and the most rewarding element to it, is the experience not only intellectually using the formal elements or interpretations of it, but instinctively acknowledging the feelings and associations it has for you personally. I don't remember the quote perfectly, but Rothko says something along the lines of 'if all you see are blocks and lines of colour then you're missing the point', and I'd agree. That's the point I guess.