No art, only artists. Or something like that. In Gombrich’s The Story of Art (1950, 600 pages) there is one female artist, KΓ€the Kollwitz. They had shared Nazi-era experiences, the work is full of emotion and confident drawing. Perhaps he means that artists are conduits of their time. His artists all show these drawing skills, which is confusing. I wonder what contemporary artists he would choose? Any? None?
Perhaps there are only art historians. Imagine. An envisioned (by themselves) scale of importance in education might be: architecture > art history > music > art > design > illustration > cartoons. This can be argued, and in fact everyone is expressing everything anyway, dilettante or otherwise, and all in context. Individually.
http://arthistorypart1.blogspot.com/2008/01/there-is-no-such-thing-as-art-there-are.html
https://gombricharchive.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/showdoc68.pdf
A great reinventor, David Hockney, talks of artists being children of time. His life is all mixed up with his art. This is confusing for us to unpick (if we wanted). Similarly with Picasso, Van Gogh, Francis Bacon, Hilma af Klint, Elsa Baroness von Freytag-Loringhoven… and so it goes. Snakes and ladders.