The only categorical difference between a child’s painting and a professional illustration is that the latter has value as a commodity. If that’s how art is being defined here then we can dismiss this opinion as deeply unserious.
The bourgeoisie have profitable opinions not serious ones.
Exactly. Kids are absolutely making art. Ask the parents how it makes them feel when their child hands them a drawing of the two of them doing something nice. My parents saved everything and they treasure those memories.
I just don’t even know how you would argue that they aren’t making art. What purer form of artistic endeavor could you name than a child being creative for its own sake? Things like technical skill, novelty, complexity, etc. are qualities that art has, but they have nothing to do with the definition itself. If a child creates something with artistic intent, that’s art. Arguing otherwise is navel-gazing prescriptivism, the same basic argument as Roman statue fetishism and just as tedious.