You're wrong about Wittgenstein. The statement is "Of what we cannot speak, we must remain silent". The tractatus separates what can be spoken about and what can't. What can't be spoken about is called nonsense, but this "nonsense" is not our common appreciation of what is "nonsense". Wittgensteinian nonsense caracterize things that are not absolutely derivable from his logical system (Ethics and Aesthetics per exemple, are nonsense subjects because if you were asked to define the moral/aesthetical notion of "best" in the sentence 'It is best to not rob people' you should fail to explain it (derive it from) by "logical phenomenons")
You can think, if you want, about what is the best way to live your life, and you can think about art, but that's not the task of the philosopher because philosophy deals with meaningful things, that can be either true or either false. A statement can be meaningful and, consequently, either true or false, only and only if :
1. It describes a state of things that happened or is happening.
OR
2. It is a tautology.
Exemple 'the chair is red' is a meaningful statement from my actual pov, because there's a logical object that I call chair, that is red, that is situated at x,y,z coordinates.
The consequence of Wittgensteinian philosophy is that philosophy has no content but is a method of framing the activity of thinking.
Wittgenstein philosophy in the tractatus functions more or less like a mathematical demonstration of the impossibility of solvation of a problem.
Also, all of the content of the tractatus is nonsense, it is like a ladder that you need to throw when you reach the top.