I agree that most modern art is pretty shitty, especially if its interpretation depends solely on the artist's explanation of what it is, but i don't wholeheartedly agree that standards should be implemented. For me, art can be one of two things: either relatable or fun. When i look at a painting or a sculpture, i want to either feel something that i think the painting might be trying to transmit (let's say a dark (but hopefully not only black color spread out on the canvas) painting makes me feel gloomy, and its that gloom that the artist was going through during the point in life where he painted it, making me relate, because the artist can make me feel emotions through his work) or at least find something fun with it (for example, there's this fountain made by Miro that instead of water spews quicksilver, so its fun to watch it make its way down to the bottom to go back up again). Having said that however, if you give me a red dot on a white canvas and say that it represents the suffering of the native americans during the trail of tears, i'm going to groan and move on to something else. Just because you can make art that comes with a deeply personal significance only you can understand doesn't mean that you should expect the world to grovel at your feet. Its like when you made that mug out of clay in elementary school for mothers day. Sure, your mother will say "oh, what a good job you did", but that doesn't mean that everyone else will agree with her.

As a side note, there was this story that circled around about Salvador Dali that this video reminded me of, where Dali supposedly created a painting and presented it in front of the art critics of the day. He was showered with praise, to his delight, for he then produced a video in which he showed them how he had made the painting. It included shitting, pissing, masturbating, and other fun things of the sort. The art critics were appalled modern art critics probably would have praised him for it and Dali got the last laugh.