When is art, art?

This past weeks Q&A discusses the idea of when is art, art. This is a change for we students in this class, for we are more familiar with the traditional question of what is art. However, the reading for this we attempts to discuss when art is actually art. Stating that a painting is art when it is intended to be art. Also a blanket is art when it is intended to be art. Given the proper judgement of an individual, saying something is art when used in a proper way is what makes it art. Therefore, if one were to subtract all forms of said representation, would one still have art? For something to be considered art, its current function must be that of which someone classifies as art. If it is not refered to as art, then it is not actually art. Then, if the representation of what makes the object art is subtracted out, all that is left is the object attempting to be classified as art.

Therefore, a question i pose is if something is art when it is doing something, then haven't we defined art right there?