And then there are others that try to come up with a highly complex Magnum Opus. Punk is simpler than prog rock, does that make King Crimson listeners bad people?
There (probably) are areas at the extreme ends of the spectrum where things are too complex/simple, but there's a big range in between that might do it for certain people. I don't believe that just liking some form of complexity is objectively bad. It's not all just complexity for complexity's sake.
And then there are others that try to come up with a highly complex Magnum Opus.
In terms of artistic works that people still actively experience, the tendency is for the classics to be simpler works. Complex works tend to be classics in the Mark Twain sense.
...does that make King Crimson listeners bad people?...I don't believe that just liking some form of complexity is objectively bad. It's not all just complexity for complexity's sake.
I don't believe that just liking some form of complexity is objectively bad either, in general. In the case of coding projects, though, I have to note that the scarcest bandwidth is often reducing team lead bandwidth. Exactly what this means is highly contextual. The tricky part here is in the "but no simpler" phrase of the Einstein quote.
You might say that I like minimalism because I'm lazy. Minimalist cuisine means fewer ingredients to prep, less cleaning later. Minimalist syntax means fewer things to keep track of and lower barriers to tool-smithing. I don't think that makes me a bad person either. The question to ask is, what is the cost/benefit now, and what's the cost of changing your mind? Sometimes the more complicated system reduces the latter cost. YMMV
Sure, teams complicated the complexity issue. Which is why things like Java are so popular, where the moving parts of the language itself are few enough.
It's jam sessions all over again. Much easier if the basics of the musical form aren't too complicated (e.g. 12 bar blues) or everybody knows the same songs already (e.g. Irish folk). Getting a random bunch of people together for some Free Jazz is a bit harder.
Bach had some complicated, almost math-like themes, but is it really more complex than Wagnerian leitmotifs and huge orchestral settings or Schoenbergian modern music where the traditional score notation can't keep up anymore?
But yeah, the analogy is easy to abuse, due to the multitude of artistic styles, and active rebellion against the "mainstream". For every Piet Mondrian out there, you can find a Chuck Close.
There (probably) are areas at the extreme ends of the spectrum where things are too complex/simple, but there's a big range in between that might do it for certain people. I don't believe that just liking some form of complexity is objectively bad. It's not all just complexity for complexity's sake.