One of the biggest questions that watching "My Kid Could Paint That" left me with is: How do we judge what is termed 'art' and what isn't? For that matter, should we even be allowed to? If the old saying holds true, and beauty IS is in the eye of the beholder, then shouldn't the only standard for art be whether or not it sells? I personally have never cared who wrote a book, or who published a piece of music, or who painted an artwork. For me, when it comes to art, I use almost solely sense perception. If it sounds good or looks nice, if I enjoy it, then I consider it 'art'. That isn't to say that it isn't art if I don't enjoy it, because that isn't true either. Maybe it would be better to say that as long as someone, somewhere, feels an emotional connection to an artwork, it can be termed art.
Ultimately, I guess what I am asking is: how do you personally define art? Should there be societal standards like the ones that exist today, or is the old saying true? Is beauty in the eye of the beholder?