[Taz's Master]

Can experiencing the subject of a work of art be as artistic an experience as experiencing the work of art itself, and if so does that make the subject art?

In some instances I'd say yes;

Then in those instances, experiencing art is entirely subjective and simply about what the viewer appreciates. I love Bill Watterson's and Matt Groening's perspectives on the issue of art appreciation. Art for me needs to serve a purpose, for me to appreciate it I should enjoy it. I'm comfortable being a neanderthal. I do believe however that those who are inclined to educate themselves to better appreciate art do so to improve their own life not so they can more easily look down on me.

Another good question. I'd say that the two are on the same level in terms of athletic prowess. But performance art isn't competitive or a game.

But that means that a figure skating competition cannot be art, and batting practice can be. I disagree, I do not see how competition disqualifies a performance from being art. If art is about mood, tension, emotion, grace, violence, love and enmity, natural beauty and human struggle then athletic competition is certainly a legitimate expression of performance art. And seriously what is the difference between you saying art isn't competitive and Sniper saying art isn't scribbles?