dave u point here so many issues that it is very difficult to respond at once. i know what u mean. i am in academy, in the department of philosophy. what u say about those "artists" i can say about the "philosophers". i also visit many times the art department and see there people, students and teachers. u point here a very painfull problem.
i will tell u why it is so eassy to pritend yourself to be a "philosopher" and may be even eassier to be an "artist"... cause in both cases there are more conceptual and principial disagreemantes between "real" educated and gifted philosophers or artist than some agreemants. that leads to some prularism, which is ok of course. the problem is that this "prularism" gets out of its contest. we find that somehow these "proffessional" disagremants are interprated as every thing is accaptable.from here it goes to some cheap rehetorics to make some impression. here there is no more philosophy ot art.
to be artist or philosopher u have to be gifted and u have to work very hard. it is not enough to say that u dont like kantian philosophy, and it is not enough to make a painting without any skills and to say then look at the paintings of egon schielle. one who says it simply doesnt understand schile and how skillfully he was making his art and what were his intentions. but again - the problem that in this "prularism" u can hide behind shiele or whoever.