Part of what separates the arts from the sciences is the subjectivity of art. It's not hard to get agreement in science... but in the arts its darn near impossible.

Definitions tend to be crafted by academics, who are usually highly influenced by the sciences... therefore, they typically use similar terminology to describe art. But art resists such rigid definition.

When something new happens, it takes a while before people notice, it takes longer before they understand and categorize it, and it takes even longer before academia formally defines it. Therefore, definitions tend to lag behind reality.

IMO, ten years from now fewer people will disagree that the guy in the video is a musician. But there may never be consensus... because art, by its nature, is subjective... we all perceive it differently and personally.

So which of the many different points of view get to be crowned as the "right" definition? It doesn't matter. Because as soon as you define art it changes into something different. Defining art empirically is like trying to make a map of where the bubbles are in a pot of boiling water.

Disclaimer: presented as my opinion, not as the one true definition

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ey71h8ep047758h/AAC12jNM0Hz9Q8zsh5iDeqNHa?dl=0