Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru

This view doesn't work. It assumes that the art and its artist exists within a vacuum, which it doesn't. Art doesn't need an audience at all, really. It merely needs to contain an idea. One's attempt to unpack that idea, interpret it, and then synthesize it into an experience and memory is the act of an audience, whether or not it's the artist alone.

Art is contained within the idea, not its manifestation. It is also often (always?) based on or influenced by ideas that came before it. So why does it need an audience beyond the act of taking away of an experience of the art and its idea? Whether someone experiences and interprets it or not does not take away its status as art—it merely exists as an misunderstood or ignored work of art.

One can say they create art for others, or for oneself, but ultimately, the power of the art is out of their hands either way. Once an idea is born and made manifest, it belongs to no one, but can be experience by everyone (or no one).