art itself comes from the time, energy, and labor poured into it.

Maybe consider if anything else had those three factors but would not be considered art. Could someone produce something with passion and still not be art? (If so, why?) Or is all passionate production art?

The consumer and their interpretation of it is an irrelevant factor here

By definition the artist has to consume their own art and is not excepted by this.

The consumer and their interpretation of it is an irrelevant factor here. Art is not created to be consumed; it is created to express. That expression can occur without any consumption taking place.

This is hyper-individualism. It is anti-social. Not withstanding the artist consumes their own art.

I am a Marxist. I know what dialectical materialism, thank you very much.

Cool.