Many before you have tried it and many more will try again because all the previous explanations seemed inadequate. Beyond that, adequately explaining the original event lies beyond the realm of most, if not all, writers. Even if we could adequately explain the experience, experience for its own sake isn't necessarily art. Though shock is a rather cliched and standard component of postmodern art, I don't believe it necessarily qualifies as art any more than a sneeze qualifies as art, even though a sneeze can sometimes be a powerful experience. A generally accepted notion is that fine art prompts experience.
Experience is abstract.
It combines what we think, how we feel, and what we guess at in between. The experience doesn't necessarily rely on content. Many other factors contribute to the aesthetic event we describe as Art. When we create art, we frequently generate something new from the creative space in front of us. In art, we generate new ideas from the extemporaneous space of our definition.