Does art need to be intentional or representational to be considered art?
I do not think that art needs to be intentional to be considered art. Hundreds of years ago when someone made something such as a bowl they may not have intended for it to become art, however today you may find that very bowl in a museum, or decorating someones living room. Further more many people find architecture as being art, but did all the Architects intend for that to happen? To say that art must be intentional would not only make our museums a little sparse, but it would leave out many pieces of unintentional art that people love today.
I also do not think that art must be representational. If it was true that art must be representational than is it true that Picasso's work is not art? I think that many people and art historians might disagree. There are many pieces of art work that are not representational, but in my opinion, they are still considered art. There are many people, including myself, that love abstract art and that feel that it is indeed art. Art is not about being intentional or representational; its about moving people to the point where they admire it.