Honest question: do you think art’s value is proportional to the time it took to create it? Like a painting that took hundreds of hours is necessarily better art than a minimalist work that might have taken a few hours, or less?
No, I think the value is in how much of and how well the human experience is compressed into the work (and how well it decompresses in the mind of the beholder).
Not op but I don't think it's proportional, it's more like an extra layer of value on top of the creation's innate value.