Fromm and Tolstoy

In a previous entry, I explained how art may possibly be defined using Erich Fromm’s theory of love—humans are isolated, and are trying to become attached to something outside of their selves to relieve the anxiety of separateness. One way of doing so is by creating art, and so perhaps art can be defined as the artist’s attempt to relieve isolation.
I could not help but notice similarities between this possible definition of art and Tolstoy’s definition. Tolstoy says art is a means of “human communion, necessary for life and for the movement towards the good of the individual man and of mankind, uniting them in the same feelings” (Wartenberg 108). Both of these definitions of art consider art to be a method of connecting us with each other, and by doing so art helps us to better ourselves. Although there may be problems with either definition, it certainly seems plausible to assume that art helps to unite us.
QUESTION: Would an art critic consider a three-year-old’s scribbles as art? The intention of the artist is certainly present.