I'll agree that within the context of the story some sort of artistic value could be derived from the mentioned urinal, but what about the rest of us? As non-artists can we assign artistic value to a work or must one be schooled in a particular brand of expression in order to do such a thing? Clearly there are going to be opposing interests at hand. We (non-artists) look at this and see another men's restroom and don't give it a second thought except for the fact that someone told us to. We look at the Mona Lisa, for example, and immediately associate it with masterful perfection.

To be fair, however, art in general only works within the process of enculturation. We've grown up in the mainstream with nice looking portraits and magnificent sculptures as our litmus test against all those wishing to imbue their works with artistic meaning. Someone in a nomadic tribe might not think the Mona Lisa is art at all according to their criteria. Maybe if we all pissed on canvases instead of urinals it might be easier to accept the work in question as "art". It's just so hard to overlook that minor detail, though.