...am surprised that there are strong feelings rejecting vidding as art.
I had always thought of my vids as art in my head, so it was strange to read comments so strongly against vids being art at all.

<>This is a much broader look at vidding than I think I’ve ever seen. I love the step back you’ve taken from the history of vidding in and of itself to place it within larger artistic trends.
I hope it didn't get boring. I'm sure some people were bored or won't be interested in the historical part.

I love many of the points you make (appropriation as art, art as changing the perception of something, art as ideas vs. objects)
I see vidding fitting in so well, especially in those.

my favorite is that art doesn’t have to be serious business.
I've never thought of art as something that had to be serious all the time. My art internship is one of the most fun and enjoyable things I've done in my entire life.

account for all sorts of vids with all sorts of different intents
I find many definitions of vidding to be narrow. I'm not trying to define the term vidding because I don't think there's a way to write one without leaving something out or pissing someone off.

Upon initially asking myself the question, it felt like saying that vidding is art meant that all vids should strive to be Important or significant in some way, visually or narratively or whatever, which is just not how I personally approach it (though sometimes I try, and always admire vids with big ambitions)
Warhol, I think, played with making art "not important". It didn't have to be something earthshattering and life changing. It could just be.

Um, not to hijack your awesome essay with vidding definition politics but the similarities in the questions really, really struck me.
Hijack away!