I'm sorry, but anyone who calls themselves an artist with any knowledge of art would clearly know the difference between the Venus Di Milo and Botticelli's Birth of Venus. For about 3 weeks Lady Gaga repeatedly got them mixed up when she had the seas shell bra on and the massive hair (Clearly the Birth of Venus, but called it the Venus Di Milo). Even though they are both based on the Goddess of love, they are both very different artworks. For one thing, one is a painting and the other is a sculpture of a normal enough looking semi-naked woman with missing arms.

So yeah, she's full of shit.
Also, someone made the point that people like Michael Jackson and Madonna never spoke about their music like she does.
That's an interesting point. Those two people in particular have shaped modern music immeasurably, nobody can deny that.
You look at Justin Timberlake and Neyo, Chris Brown and Usher and there is Michael Jackson influences. You look at Britney, Christina, Heck..even Miley and you can see the shock tactics of early Madonna and other influences from her.
And yet I never heard of either of them, MJ or Madonna, hyping themselves up as much as Gaga does.
They both just did their thing and left it up to the people, critics and history to determine how important it was.

If the music was so important and if it was art and if it spoke for itself, why the need to dress it up with elaborate stage shows and ridiculous daily Halloween costumes?
Ok it's fun and creative and visually it is something interesting to see. But there comes a point when there's only so many times you can watch gaga donning a spectacular headpiece or wearing a "bizarre" costume before it looses all meaning and it becomes just a daily spectacle, bereft of any meaning besides publicity. And I think that time has come.

It's all Smoke and mirrors.

TGJ often refers to "Smoke and Mirrors" when talking about Rihanna, but I've never heard her once hype herself up over her songwriting or even singing ability, whereas for Gaga it is as constant barrage of self promotion and narcissism on an interview by interview basis.

I fear the only reason why she keeps droning on about how her music is art is to give her generic music credibility to her impressionable and fiercely loyal fan-base.
They hear Gaga saying that her new music is amazing and the best stuff they'll hear and then the Monsters listen to it and say "Well Geese, this is amazing and the best stuff I've heard", even though they're listening to a run-of-the-mill EDM beat accompanied by lyrics like:
"Have an oyster, baby
It’s Aphrod-isy
Act sleazy
Venus....
Uranus!
Don’t you know my ass is famous?"

Ok, so if I took a shit on stage in front of a whole group of poor innocent bystanders and I called it an artwork, really and truly nobody could argue that it wasn't a piece of art.
But at the end of the day it's still pooh on a stage.

I would just like to remind people out there that there is definitely something called bad art out there.
Just because something comes with the tag "Art", it does not mean that it is on some higher level or in anyway greater because of this label.
It could actually just be shit art.