I don&#x27;t think there can really be a distinction between what art &quot;should be&quot; versus what art &quot;is&quot;. You could maybe argue that a particular piece or style of art should be different, but does it really make sense to say that art should be something else?<p>More to the point, I think that definition is a little dissatisfying. By that metric, I have probably never created any art in my life -- because I&#x27;m not an artist with limited-edition work in a gallery. To me, that is unacceptable for a definition of art. Artistry is something more intrinsic to human nature than just being a thing made by an &quot;artist&quot; and put in an artistic context to be admired by hipsters and to confuse people.