Art or Entertainment?

"Teaching has to do with the idea of passing information, facts, history, the aesthetics, philosophy, the morality of the situation, who the people were, the periods, and cannot leave out any of that. Now, as I said the other day, if you’re going to ascribe to this music [the quality of] art, then those things apply to it. If it is solely entertainment, then those things do not apply to it, and I think people are very confused sometimes because they want it both ways.” -- Bill Dixon

Is music a form of art or an entertainment or it can be both? I am certainly not a qualified art critic, but I believe that what distingushs a piece of music composition an art or solely an entertainment lies in the process of creativity. If the process allows a certain boundry to influence the outcome of the creativity, or if the creativity is to fulfill the form of a certain boundry, then I would tend to think that the outcome of the process, music in this case, is not in a form of art. For example, if the intention of a composer is to compose a piece of music in Bossa Nova, then his/her creativity has already been pre-set by a certain boundry and the composition can hardly be justified to be an art.

Having made the above statement, however, it is still argueable if there exists a piece of composition which is not influenced by any genre of music. Therefore, my belief is that music is a form of art only if it is highly original and creative. What do you think?

Of course I am not against music that entertains. Now where is that Bossa Nova record I like?