Chap­ter 18 — What is “Art”? opens with the rec­ol­lec­tion of a young artist’s uncer­tain­ty in the shad­owy world of for­eign stu­dios, where the phrase “it’s not Art” was often wield­ed as a con­clu­sive cri­tique. These dis­missals, vague yet pow­er­ful, cast doubt not only on the work pro­duced but on the very iden­ti­ty of the cre­ator. Among stu­dents and teach­ers alike, con­fu­sion reigned, as stan­dards seemed sub­jec­tive and ever-chang­ing. There was no rule­book, only a cho­rus of opin­ions, many of which con­tra­dict­ed each oth­er. Such an envi­ron­ment fos­tered not growth, but hes­i­ta­tion. The fear of being told one’s work “wasn’t art” could sti­fle cre­ative courage before it ful­ly emerged.

Amidst this con­fu­sion, the chap­ter tracks the insta­bil­i­ty of artis­tic fame and rep­u­ta­tion. Bastien-Lep­age, once admired as a rev­o­lu­tion­ary fig­ure in French paint­ing, fell quick­ly from grace, his style labeled out­dat­ed with­in a few years. What had once been acclaimed by crit­ics and col­lec­tors was lat­er dis­missed with laugh­ter. This rapid shift illus­trates the fick­le nature of cul­tur­al taste. The point is clear: pub­lic con­sen­sus on art is often unre­li­able. The art world’s val­u­a­tion shifts like fash­ion, reward­ing some, then for­get­ting them. The nar­ra­tor sees this as a reflec­tion not of the artist’s worth but of the capri­cious stan­dards set by a few.

Art’s val­ue, the author argues, can­not lie sole­ly in recog­ni­tion or mon­e­tary appraisal. Prices climb and fall, and cel­e­brat­ed artists of one gen­er­a­tion are ignored in the next. Even old mas­ters are not immune—some gain hon­or posthu­mous­ly, oth­ers fade despite their genius. This volatil­i­ty reveals how frag­ile our def­i­n­i­tions of artis­tic worth are. True mer­it must lie else­where, not in mar­kets or muse­um walls. What mat­ters, per­haps, is not recog­ni­tion, but resonance—how deeply a piece can move the heart. This leads the nar­ra­tive to seek a more ground­ed and human-cen­tered def­i­n­i­tion.

In Tolstoy’s assertion—that art is any form of emo­tion­al com­mu­ni­ca­tion between individuals—the author finds clar­i­ty. This idea, so sim­ple yet pro­found, breaks art free from exclu­siv­i­ty and the­o­ry. It places mean­ing in the con­nec­tion cre­at­ed, not in the cre­den­tials of the cre­ator. One need not be trained or endorsed to cre­ate some­thing mean­ing­ful. A poem scrib­bled in grief, a draw­ing made in joy—these too are art if they share a gen­uine human feel­ing. This under­stand­ing turns every­one into a poten­tial artist. Cre­ativ­i­ty is not reserved for the elite but acces­si­ble to all who feel and express.

Reject­ing elit­ism, the author chal­lenges the com­mon belief that art must be eval­u­at­ed by experts to be valid. Crit­ics and cura­tors may guide opin­ions, but they do not define truth. Art can­not be dic­tat­ed by aca­d­e­m­ic lan­guage or gallery approval. Instead, it must be felt by the view­er, not explained away. By demys­ti­fy­ing art, the chap­ter calls for empa­thy to replace analy­sis. In that view, a child’s paint­ing has the same emo­tion­al val­ue as a master’s canvas—if it moves us, it suc­ceeds. Art lives in emo­tion, not per­fec­tion.

The nar­ra­tive con­tin­ues by ques­tion­ing whether muse­ums and insti­tu­tions are help­ing or hurt­ing the public’s rela­tion­ship with art. When works are dis­played as relics rather than liv­ing expres­sions, their impact may be dulled. Too often, view­ers feel unqual­i­fied to inter­pret or enjoy them. But when a piece is approached with open­ness instead of rev­er­ence, it can speak direct­ly to the soul. The author sug­gests art should invite rather than intim­i­date. Art edu­ca­tion, then, should focus less on cri­tique and more on connection—encouraging cre­ation, not just appre­ci­a­tion.

In that spir­it, the chap­ter encour­ages ordi­nary peo­ple to engage with art in dai­ly life. Singing a song, tak­ing a pho­to­graph, or shar­ing a sto­ry all fall under Tolstoy’s inclu­sive vision. These acts, when born of emo­tion and shared sin­cere­ly, hold as much artis­tic weight as for­mal works. By this log­ic, com­mu­ni­ty murals, diary entries, and even heart­felt con­ver­sa­tions are valid forms of art. This idea breaks down the bar­ri­er between audi­ence and cre­ator. It trans­forms art from a prod­uct into a process.

Ulti­mate­ly, Chap­ter 18 — What is “Art”? stands as a man­i­festo for emo­tion­al authen­tic­i­ty in cre­ative expres­sion. It cri­tiques the arbi­trary sys­tems that have tried to define and lim­it art while embrac­ing a broad­er, freer, and more humane under­stand­ing. Through this lens, art is no longer a prize to be earned but a nat­ur­al human act to be shared. By focus­ing on con­nec­tion instead of clas­si­fi­ca­tion, the chap­ter restores art to its orig­i­nal pur­pose: to express what it means to feel, to live, and to be under­stood.