I've had my reservations ethically on becoming an artist and it took some soul searching to understand why that is. I think the philosopher Plato can express the probelms that I've had in intending to create art for the public.
Plato objects to art ontologically - as in the experience of it - because he sees art in the realm of images as opposed to physical objects; hence, it has the lowest ontological status because images are just copies of copies of copies. He also has a moral objection in that art appeals not to the intellect - as does philosophy - but to the passions, which it stirs up an already chaotic public. Therefore, art can be dangerous.
I will not disagree with his objections; these are common qualities that art does possess. But, I implore you that art can possess virtue and insight not only for personal development and growth but also for intellectual insight; to cultivate the progress of man as a species and to plumb the depths of one's unconscious - that's looking back at you and learning along with you.
Aristotle would say the function of art is memesis (or imitation) - to represent something that is real. Art does not have to be only this. The style I've developed is surrealistic abstract (who knows, it may be better put as abstract surreal). It's abstract lines that are surrealized into recognizable shapes that are formed by the mind's heuristics - which are the mind's mechanisms for making sense of the world. To understand more go to the "How it's developed."