What is it about this type of art you like?

John Cage and Hans Hoffman. People and art of that sort. Why do you like it. 4:33 seconds. Laburnum. I don't get it. I'm not saying it is not art but to me it seems like there was more of a philosophy behind it. To me some of this stuff is just ridiculous. Some people say it is because of the emotion, it breaks rules, it's revolutionary. Well, what if I sat down all angry and took out my anger on a piece if paper with a pencil and scribbled it all away on it? Wouldn't that have been done with emotion, no rules, and spontaneous? Or maybe I'll sit on my piano (I do play piano) and start smashing on the keys with the strength and emotion provided by the anger. Loud and chromatic notes screaming my anger to the heavens. A confusion of notes. Would that be seen as art? Would those be admired throughout history? Why not? What am I missing? Is fame what I need in order for my art to be seen as art? I am not trying to argue. I'm just wondering because it seems that sometimes these people don't even care or do it for the sake of just being different. Different isn't always better. I think if your art is made for the sole purpose of being different then it is not art that really comes from you. Sometimes old traditional art might seem structured and some of it or a lot of it is but it doesn't mean it can't be beautiful as art without rules or guidelines can also be. I respect your opinion as I hope you respect mine. Thanks for answering and sorry for the big paragraph.