Lie to tell the truth

Below is an essay I thought worthy of blogging. It contains no one's opinions but my own, so reader beware, you have been warned: extreme art snobbery to come.

Art is a lie, and it is simultaneously the greatest truth achievable by man. Art is limitless in form, and can range from a child’s finger paints to an Oscar winning performance, with no single form being the better of any other. To the extent that this is true, the umbrella term ‘art’ is painfully broad and equally as subjective.
To offer my rudimentary understanding of art: art is any expression of the creator which imparts to the consumer (audience, viewer, listener, etc) some concept for consideration and discussion by way of metaphor-- in the form of a concrete (observable, audible, etc) composition, object, performance, display—the list goes on ad nauseum.
What I mean to say here is that despite what form it takes, art should be measured by the effect it has to others, namely, that it sparks/adds to discourse on some concept which it ( by deliberate action of the artist) calls attention to through the use of creative (and sometimes very subtle) metaphor. This definition assumes, of course the artists attention to detail, and creative control over his/her own work and the message conveyed therein. An arbitrary composition of any kind without point or purpose (in other words ‘art without something to say’) is almost non-existent, and by my definition would not be considered art. Furthermore it takes into consideration the fundamental assumption that the process of creating art is one that begins at a concept, which becomes an idea and then ends with the creation of a concrete piece of ‘art’. It is important to note here that in making the final product the artists own views and passions enter the work and speak through the medium (the metaphor) to touch the audience in some way, and inspire discourse and growth in those touched by it. In sum, art is also a catalyst for new ideas.
This definition is at once very inclusive and simultaneously exclusive of the arbitrary creation void of meaning or statement which occasionally passes for art. Of this I admit in any context I abhor, but it is especially insulting to see a piece without concept or position or worldview, any substance or something to say given the title ‘art’, or to allow this to be applied to the artistic pursuits, especially in light of the painstaking attention to detail devoted to some items of art which contrast starkly with these non-art examples.