Nah, there's not a lot of contention in the art/craft thing. Art will always involve good craft and craft may involve art, no big deal.
;-)
As to the definition and use of the word "art," as you point out Al, the word has been greatly cheapened in recent history. That is no reason for us to rape the real definition, especially to lend its perverted meaning to things are are clearly not art. Frankly, a modern Webster's dictionary is a poor reference for our world. It is sometimes little more than a topical slave to society's idiocy. A 1940's version would be a far better reference.
Yes, art requires skill and ingenuity and is often a branch of learning, but it does the world of art a disservice (and is an utter nonsequitur) to label any skill, any use of ingenuity or any branch of learning as "art." That's an example of being too smart by half. Remember when being a "good student" meant that a person did the work and scored A's in all subjects. Now the term "good student" is a person who shows up occasionally, tries hard (regardless of the result) and does not shoot the teacher. Our world is harmed when we rape the meanings of words.
Now, this is a great discussion of semantics, but the point is that There are things of art and things not of art in this world and it is misguided to lump them together. Further, there is good art and bad art (reference to the element of skill and ingenuity again) and it is misguided to place them at the same "level." Otherwise, as I wrote in a past editorial, my 4-year old son's kitchen table finger paintings are as artistically important as Monet's works.
So we can pervert the meaning of "art," but that is not a worthwhile endeavor and will not change the fact that some of what some call art is just crap and some is actually meaningful work (artistic, some might say ;-).
Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
b u n j i n | d e s i g n ::
www.bunjindesign.com
zone 8, Texas