I think the title artist is simply just another role played by the magician, flourisher, painter, etc. I think it's necessary to call something an art form because it's the symbolic aspect of magic, i think that the title of magician or flourisher is the physical part and artist is used because people or rather laypeople can't understand or comprehend what's happening and why emotions are evoked. It's a necessary evil to call bedroom magicians artists no matter how bad they are (trust me on this i used to be one) because it's impossible to understand why they would take a camera and film themselves juggling cards or whatnot. In my opinion it's better than calling everyone prestidigitator or some other long hard to pronounce name or wtv. It's because we know what an artist is we can imagine what that would like like, it's completely rational and because of this i think the word artist is rather derogatory, and we can transcend this by evoking that emotion and bringing it to the irrational zone. I think the word artist is there just to limit anyone's potential, to be able to understand why the magician springs his cards, or why the painter let's take Jackson Pollock for instance uses big drips of paint, no one knows why, the word artist explains this in a weird way if you think about it. Dai Vernon once said that "any rule in any art can be broken" it's because when someone does something so extraordinary, so weird, so innovative no on knows what to call it, so we call this person an artist. So in my opinion if you want to insult someone call him an artist( something rational, something bland) if you want to compliment someone call them the son of satan or something (irrational). in any case i still think "it better to do your profession good than let your profession do you good."
