No more coffee thanks, I'm hungry..

What factors are key in making a work of art a work of art? Much art that is made at present has its origins in design rather than art. There is an intention to make something and the thing is conceived in its entirety from the outset - modifications can be made but the essential dynamic of the work is controlled from the start and not discovered through the making - in fact the making merely facilitates the conception becoming real. In a true work of art the making should become the work. I would identify all making as "drawing". Responding to the nature of materials through the natural ebb and flow of working with them is the how art happens , whereas using these same elements to produce a known outcome is more in the realm of design. Designed art is trendy and avoids problems; it knocks off edges and streamlines visual forces so they work together. Art is awkward; at its heart is the conflict of forces, tension and dilemma. This battle underpins it. A visual struggle can only really occur when the outcome is a little more uncertain, for it will allow instinct (which will become honed and fine tuned through repeated practice) to rise to the fore. For example, have a look at a Kapoor and you see an opulent form of "design-Art", yet look at Noland as a comparison and you see an equally opulent form at "art-Art". Materials are consummately controlled by each artist , yet the dividing line is clear in my mind - I like design-art - it's "cool" -nice with a latte and a crisp newspaper, an event to drop in on, a diversion from a busy day. Though I much prefer to see -and make- art-art; as I see that as integral to a busy day. It sustains one and affirms the travails of the day in a more rewarding way - visual food rather than visual coffee.