Why do you think it's French? The term has developed a distinct meaning among speakers of English. It has slightly different connotations than alternative phrases, as the sibling comment points out.
It may be derived from French, but it has a distinct meaning in English. You might as well ask why someone is using French when they say they're going to see a ballet. It's a feature of English (and really, most languages) that foreign words and phrases are often imported and given connotations distinct from both the meaning in the language of origin and from other words or phrases in English. Once that adoption is widely recognized, is it really not English?
That's a reasonable question, and one I asked myself. I considered some options:
- "Piece of art" didn't communicate engagement with the item as art
- "Work of art" is often used to mean a masterpiece
- "Artwork" is a neologism of the sort I avoid
Finally, "objet d'art" communicates appreciation as art, but not necessarily any artistic quality, and it's a phrase people use in this context.
While we're asking irrelevant questions, why are the majority of your comments questions and criticisms of trivial matters of wording? Obviously, we agree that words are important, but it's equally important to engage with the intended meaning of those words.
It may be derived from French, but it has a distinct meaning in English. You might as well ask why someone is using French when they say they're going to see a ballet. It's a feature of English (and really, most languages) that foreign words and phrases are often imported and given connotations distinct from both the meaning in the language of origin and from other words or phrases in English. Once that adoption is widely recognized, is it really not English?