A mentor of mine, Vernon Atterberry when asked the question from a student "what is art?" answered: "Art is the expression of an idea". In Art, I have yet to find a more simple and true statement as this. Perhaps expressions can be brought to such a level of artistry to be called Art and all ideas expressed also be defined as Art. A lot has been lost to the creative process through individuals lacking the means of craftsmanship in works of "Art". Maybe it is far more simple to draw a line that does not define Art, instead shows the merit of worth or the lack there of.
"Maybe the best we can do is to further the discussion of what is Art."
Perceiving Art historically, what was Art to the creator will eventually become irrelevant. The creation will contribute to a greater narrative of culture or will be lost and forgotten. If we are honest enough to look at Art through a historical lens, we can realize that to look at a work of Art and appreciate its existence is also to appreciate and understand the personal reaction and interpretation of the Artist, that narrates a time and place that describes a culture lived in and their social climate.
To save time of pointless semantics with philosophers who do not paint we should stop here. Any definition could and maybe should be discussed to simply further the conversation. In the end, history will always have the last word.
-tb