No, it isn't perfection; whatever that is.
What I am so drawn to is originality. I tried hard to pick apart what that meant. I only came away with the word 'brutal' but not from its Latin origins. Brutally honest, brutally original, brute as in force.

Then I heard in one of my favorite movies 'Shirley' Stanley Edgar Hyman tell his protege:

"Originality is the alchemy of critical thought and creativity"

Moving on to say "Mediocrity, if it were terrible, that would be profound, but terrifically competent, there is no excuse for that."

He was talking about the actions of derivative works. I have to say, I somewhat agree. Originality is the thing that brings me alive in works, and derivative, meaning 'copying another writer or artist or thinker' with some clout or upwardly mobile fame, that is repelling to me.
I've seen not only the writer's style but their very mannerisms and language copied as in a movement that looks more like a type of religion. Bringing a writer's genius into a form of thought is one thing, writers and artists are studied, but this is different, different than neglecting the entirety of one's mold. Falling into the current of a movement to carry one downstream without knowing the destination.

Brutal originality is brutal honesty. However, it lands with the aesthete that nearly doesn't matter. Whether widely accepted or not, I will always admire the original thinker, over a derived and movement-driven artist.