Creative writing? Nope, never was a reliable source of marks for me. My heroes consistently failed to extract themselves from the impossibly convoluted and hair-raising horrors that I penned them into, and the stories almost always ended with someone that wakes up with a start … it was all a dream! Clearly, I took my literary inspiration from Dallas.
Serious? You should visit PE. We’ve had one for ages.
Rigil
Perhaps it is the case that if, as brianvds suggests, “we could precisely codify what exactly that ‘something’ is” then anything based on such a codification ceases to be art for want of originality (or an essential element thereof).
However, it’s not obvious to me that, provided such a codification is sufficiently abstract, it would somehow forestall originality. An accomplished artist who works in a particular medium with a preferred style (e.g., a painter who only does pointillisms on hardboard) can of course only render works that are physically possible with that combination of medium and style, but that does not mean the art so produced lacks originality because the content of the work counts at least as much as its presentation.
And so, with regards to my earlier post about English Creative Writing, it is similarly a bit of stretch to suggest that because an author works in a particular genre with a style that is their own but still recognisably derivative of other authors, such an author lacks originality because plot, structure, character development, etc. are also critical ingredients (Stephen King and John Grisham are good examples).
The “type of composition and a writing style” I wrote about isn’t a rigid algorithmic or automated procedure where you churn out virtual clones under different titles. Rather, it’s a somewhat fuzzy and loose collection of flexible guidelines and preferred ways of structuring a story, of phrasing things, of characterisation, of plot elements, and so on — and also what to avoid concerning those aspects. I think the school’s aim was to inculcate the ability to recognise what is generally thought of as good writing, and to get pupils to emulate it. It’s not an easy thing to convey those aspects of writing, and I suspect the teaching thereof is even more difficult, hence the focus on classic literature where the pupil is exposed to them and will hopefully try to imitate them, eventually to refine the overall flavour of their writing to their own unique blend.
Finally, we must not lose sight of the fact that, lacking precise evaluation criteria, a work of “art” can only become a classic through sufficient consensus of various individuals and parties. As individuals, we may or may not like a specific painting or sculpture or composition, but our opinion in any particular case has only limited relevance concerning whether the work in question is true art or not. For example, I have a pervasive and especial, even morbid, dislike of collages but I wouldn’t presume to suggest that they aren’t art.
'Luthon64
I wrote a few poems not sure they qualify for that somewhat esoteric title. Each time I did this, it was done expressing some emotion such as losing my grandson or deep love for my wife etc. Also when I was diagnosed with MDR TB. I don’t claim they were “arty” but they did give me a sense of release and today I can go back and re-read them with some “revision” of those erstwhile emotions: Here’s one written by my son in law:
BLVD
Specious delicious
Fishnet stocking
Vivacious salacious
Shaven haven
Magnetic fluorescent
Fifty buck special
Inconsummate delegate
Irritating (b) itch
Lemme guess: your essay was titled “50 Shades of Grey.” 
Not at all anything risqué, but I’m stumped about what it was about… That was a long time ago.
I dabbled some as well a long time ago. Helped me deal with depression quite well actually, I lived.
EDIT: Reg that poem, I will recount some “wisdom” I encountered years ago: “Bitches aint nuthin but tricks and hoes.”
your essay was titled "50 Shades of Grey".that was one of the worst books I have ever read. Self-indulgent crap...sex is great but jisses man it was gross and I am by no means an angel
50 Shades of Miss Grey 
Same principle applies as why a banknote is worth anything: there is a limited supply and there is general agreement that it has value. Ain’t got anything to do with the aesthetics, whatever the learned art professors might tell you after the fact.
I got this question (i.e. why this sort of art sells for so much) on Quora so often I eventually wrote a whole blog post about it, but I’d have to go look it up now. Will post the link here if and when I find it.
There ya go:
I’m surprise the “art” bit contains so much as a smudge. Artists have in fact exhibited and sold blank canvases as art. 
