What makes something a work of art?

One of the hardest questions to answer. To this day there is not a single way to be correct about it and as far as I am concerned there is not just one thing that makes something a work of art. 

The difficulty in responding to this call lies in its subjective nature; no matter how many times you try to encapsulate the term in one idea, there is always the possibility of the concept being refuted. This is due to the fact that the elements utilized to describe it are attached to their context and their intersectionality. So qualities and components like gender, age, class, race or background of the artist, medium used, skill level, location, temporality, risk taken, network and social context among others will be regularly interconnected to conspire and make a particular thing a work of art.

However none of this would have relevance if we wouldn’t consider the viewers perspective. When talking about making art we are focusing on one part of the equation, so what about the other part? The viewer is surrounded by another full set of intersectional components that would affect their perception at the moment to appreciate whatever is in front of their eyes, so the line between these two is blurred and in constant motion highlighting once again that the definition of a work of art is a subjective idea.

The criteria is as wide as combinations of the variants can exist. But if I have to epitomize this thought, as an artist I would say that a work of art is an expression conceived to evoke a feeling, question the status quo or change the reality we live in and above all that has the ability to transcend space and time.