[ 1 min read ]
Leo Tolstoy dedicated an entire book to the definition of art.
What is and what isn’t art.
He analysed existing definitions and gave reasons why he believed that these were wrong definitions, and, of course, why his definition was better.
How the heck did he know what is and what isn’t art?
Who gave him the authority to establish one true definition of it?
Of course, he is not alone. More people did that.
Does it matter what the right definition of art is? Who is / was right and who isn't / wasn’t? Whose job would be to give a verdict? And why?
My take, it really doesn’t matter (what the right definition of art is).
In the grand scheme of things what importance does it have? None.
Is there some punishment for having a different interpretation / definition of art than the majority of people, or than the art establishment?
No. You won’t go to jail for that.
So define art for yourself and don’t try to impose this definition on others.
If you made something, it probably was / is art. If you made it because you wanted to make it / you felt like making it (nobody told you to, or paid you for it), it almost certainly was / is art.
If the opposite was true, it probably wasn’t / isn’t art.