Art doesn't need...people!

Nice guesses on yesterday's blip! I particularly liked Red's idea: "Art doesn't need Paul". I myself am a huge Simon and Garfunkle fan. :)

But the actual answer was "Art doesn't need people."
I personally don't agree with this statement. Of course, the subject of art doesn't have to be a person in order for it to be considered art, and perhaps art doesn't even need people to create it. It can be found in one's environment, by accident.
But I do believe that art needs people to interpret it. Otherwise, what would make it art? And what would its purpose be?