Art (Op. Ed. 1st article)

Which "speaks" more to you? 3-D art, like dancing, acting, sculptures, singing, etc. or 2-D art, like writing, drawing, painting, sketching, etc. To me, art is seeing life the way the artist sees it, and understanding it. In my mind, 3-D art speaks more. Seeing things in motion, like dancing and acting, give me a bit more insight into the artist's mind. Singing gives me words that make me think mor in-depth about whether or not they have a deeper meaning. It verbalizes what the artist is saying. Sculptures can give more info about what the artist intended us to see from it. 2-D art is just different. It's flat and still. Drawing, painting, sketching, and photography are all open to controversy because there is no words to back up exactly what the artist was thinking. I think that they leave too much space for people to clutter with their own thought about what it's supposed to say, rather than trying to figure out exactly what the artist intended. Writing is a bit different. The words are right there, telling you what's going on. So i would put writing in its own category . Maybe not even consider it art.
What would you consider writing? In my opinion, art is open for interpretation. But writing kind of tells you exactly what the author wants you to think. I suppose it depends what kind of writing you're talking about. Poetry is definetly art because it is open for inerpretation. You can think what you want about what the author means. But novels and non-fiction peices are informational and more to the point. So in my opinion, poetry is art, but other writing is not.
What could we define art as? Perhaps it is anything a person has created that is open to interpretation by the audience.