That's a fair point. I would say that if I don't understand the meaning of something there are two options. 1) There is a meaning that I am not seeing, or 2) there is no meaning.

To continue with your analogy, I could also hit random keys on a keyboard for hundreds of pages. If I use the spacebar liberally and make vowells a bit more frequent, it could appear like a foreign language, but it would, in fact, be meaningless. How would I determine if it's a language or nonsense? Well first I might ask if anybody can read it. If I'm sceptical of people claiming to read it, I might ask if two people can arrive at the same meaning independently. If no one can read I might look for patterns that that are suggestive of language and see if it can be deciphered.

Clearly some things are meaningless (rock, chewed up gum, etc), but I'd love to be wrong about any art that I consider meaningless. I'd love for someone to be able to show me clear, non-BS meaning to a piece I thought was meaningless. That's an opportunity for me to grow and widen my perspective, but someone has to actually show me the meaning first. Until then I will argue passionately that it has none.

You're replying on a thread about a piece of art with so little meaning that no one realized it was upside down for decades...

I once bent down in a (modern) art museum to look at an dehumidifier, the security guard felt compelled to tell me that "wasn't art", "a lot of people think it is, but it's not."

Here's an "invisible statue" https://nypost.com/2021/06/03/artist-sells-invisible-sculpture-for-over-18k/

I can't count the number of paintings that are two or three solid rectangles of color. Arranged verically or horizontally, I'd love to hear how those tell a story. If you think that has meaning, I'd suggest you aren't giving enough importance to the term. It may convey a 'vibe' or 'feeling' but it doesn't have meaning. Hence it is meaningless. No strawman, I'll defend that point as long as I'm alive.

Anyways, sorry for the extent I mischaricterized your views, I've heard similar things from others before and grouped your statement in with their opinions. But as a final statement, I'll say that art that only conveys a 'vibe' or 'feeling,' as opposed to having real meaning feels "kind of empty to me."

You're refuting a strawman. No educated person dislikes abstract art for that reason, or at the very least not just that reason. Abstract is also too broad of a term. What most people object to is meaningless art, and it's adherents who are too obsessed with viewing themselves as smart to admit they don't see a non-existent meaning. Quality traditional art is subtle, but the meaning and significance of the is still able to come through without knowing the title (indeed most historical paintings weren't titled). Much of modern art is either completely devoid of meaning (not that there's anything wrong with a quality, beautiful craft, but it doesn't need to be lionized in a museum) or the piece practically hits you over the head with it's (often highly political) meaning. I dislike modern art largely because I want a return to subtlety embedded in quality craftsmanship with intricate details such that the painting gets better the more, and closer, you look at it. 17th century Dutch and 19th century American landscapes are a fantastic example of this!