It is definitely that. But the art critics also use very loaded terms and such to also confuse any discussion. That language is also used to identify the 'in' crowd too.

Examples:

"Emptied of stores and absent of humans, Columbus’s photograph captures the melancholic discomfort of liminal aesthetics — the strange, simultaneous pull of disquiet and nostalgia that makes this bottom-up, crowd-curated digital movement among the most pertinent and explicit artistic reactions to the strange, surreal experience of living in our particular moment of dystopian late capitalism."

Holy run-on dense sentence, Batman! The amount of connected jargon (and overloading the jargon) is said in such a way that you cant engage with it. That should have been 3 sentences.

"As an internet phenomenon, the most recent iteration of liminal aesthetics can be primarily traced to a 2019 Creepypasta collaborative short story entitled “The Backrooms,” which first appeared on the message board 4chan."

And heres a backup of the original 4chan post https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/22661164/#22661164

As much as 4chan spouts (slur for black people, slur for gay people, pro-nazi propaganda), that thread is super approachable by everyone. 'Post your disquieting images that feel off'.

"Obviously, the clearest thematic precursor to Liminalism is Edward Hopper. There is a stolid, individualistic, bootstrapping Protestant work ethic element to Hopper’s work, which is, in its sheer insanity, the wellspring of the alienation implicit in Liminalism."

First, the definition is researching that artist, and trying to even understand their place and all the hidden meanings there. But the point is name dropping, showing the "in group" that they really totally know what theyre talking about.

The reality is that art really is for everyone! Humans have been making art since before we were homo sapiens. The problem is the arrogant art critique world is trying to gatekeep "art" to their own definitions and nomenclature that excludes the masses.