How a minimalist's room might be considered ugly? (3,4,2,4,2)
I believe the answer is:
not much to look at
'how a minimalist's room might' is the definition.
I know nothing about this answer so I cannot tell whether this works.
'be considered ugly?' is the wordplay.
I cannot really see how this works, but
'be' could be 'lookat' (looking at is a kind of being) and 'lookat' is located in the answer.
This explanation may well be incorrect...
Can you help me to learn more?
(Other definitions for not much to look at that I've seen before include "Euphemism for someone who is unattractive" , "plain" , "Little in prospect" , "situation requiring a microscope?" .)