But is it art?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080611/us_nm/art_toys_dc


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080611/ap_on_re_us/obscenity_or_art;_ylt=AlLHTAVPe1gWbl5c1D_8Gl1vzwcF


At first you might not think these two stories were related. The first one is a fairly interesting story about a guy who built a giant erector set skyscraper in New York. The other is about a guy on trial for obscenity in California.

But skim down the first story to the last paragraph. The man was shot in the arm as a piece of performance art. I'm not sure how I should emphasize that one. Should I italicize - shot in the arm - or put in quotations - "performance art". Tough call. The second one is about a guy who does fetish and gang rape porn films who's been caught in an FBI obscenity sting. He calls scat films "art". I know exactly where the quotes belong on that one. That's right. Both of these fine gentlemen consider themselves artists.

Has art really become so hard for most people to define that it could either be the Mona Lisa or Twyla Tharpe or self-mutilation or actual film of someone being brutalized? If the test case is "I know it when I see it", and the range has become this big, then some of us aren't real clear on the distinction.