you're going to need to define "art" in order to pull this off. as long as you provide a working definition that is absolutely independent of whatever values an individual places on an art object, then you can easily debunk any idiot who says offensive art should not be called art.
this would a very good place to start:
Alfred Gell, 1998, Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory
it's oop and damned expensive, but your uni library will surely have a copy...
|