I'll try the original questions. I think this special sense of the word "art" that is hard to define is goofy. Usually we mean painting or sculpture, or these painting and sculpture by-products, but all the arts are art, and it's ridiculous to have this painting-y sense of theatrical performance called "performance art". Isn't it? It's like these people feel they aren't handicapped by having an education in their own medium. Well, okay, but why do they tend to look just like sophomores?

Art is easy to define. Ballon animals are art. If I wanted to set boundries I'd say illustrated lectures aren't art, but okay, it's art I don't care for usually, or take very seriously.

   The art that we set aside as especially worthwhile then. I'm not sure it really is. But I like it anyway, and I look for observation, imagination, and maybe just a little bit of an idea. An idea without the appeal of observation and reflection of life is more an essay to me, maybe a good one, but not an experience you sink into like art. Sometimes you have to look at it the right way to see the likeness, and I'm not opposed to having to learn about it a bit. You have to to watch a ball game, but some people think you should be able to get any art without paying any attention.

I like this topic, and like to rattle on, but won't. I don't have a favorite artist, but like special odd pieces. First artist I ever really loved was Leonardo, for that soft grey-day weather he usually painted. That got me.