I actually addressed the question of "what is art?" in an article published in 1984... in a journal called Crescat Scientia. I dare anyone to find it.

Basically, to be a "work of art" displayed in a museum, the rules are, you have to name the artist ("anonymous" will do), give it a title ("untitled" will do) and display it. That's all it takes. Whatever qualities it may have, or lack, as a work of art, are completely beside the point. It is generally considered appropriate for the artist named to have contributed in some way to the creation of the work of art; but this is not necessary.

The chain ring on my Norman is not a work of art. It is a bicycle component. If I took it off the bike, mounted it on the wall, and put a little tag next to it saying "Chain ring, designer unknown, chromed steel, English, ca 1950" then it would be a work of art.

Whether it's any good or not, that's for the critics to decide.