In this thesis, I provide and argue for the Minimalist Declaration View on Art. In short, this institutional understanding of art is that something is art if, and only if, it has been declared art. I argue this by showing first, the strengths and weaknesses of the best available institutional account of art, that is Cathrine Abell’s. I then provide an alternative minimalistic view that keeps Abell’s fruitful use of a Searlean framework and combines it with the recent non-ideal critique directed toward Searle. This novel approach avoids Abell’s problems arising from her pluralist view on art institutions while it, unlike previous institutional accounts, can account for solitary artists. After answering three possible objections concerning the view's empty concept of art, possession of authority, and the value of art, I conclude this view is both a plausible and the preferable institutional account of art.