The zeitgeist
Arnold describes art in various ways throughout the book, but more than just seeing the aesthetic value of an artwork or a cultural meme, the author sees the art in terms of its commentary on culture. The combination of all the art in a population is the culture of the population in his description. He says that the zeitgeist is essentially a response to power and the status quo, so it is anti-authoritarian in essence, he explains. The zeitgeist is described for its tangible and intangible aspects.
Essence and meaning
Arnold sees the world as a network of meaning, so that an artwork makes a statement in a lengthy, complicated conversation about life's essential meaning. This imagery is seen on every level of analysis, since art is inherently connected to the essence of human life and man's search for meaning, to borrow the language of Frankl's famous book. Art is essentially shown as the concrete imagery of the culture manifesting itself through people and their unique points of view.
Freedom
Freedom is easy enough to understand philosophically, at least with a cursory glance. But, the closer Arnold's commentary gets to actually explaining the connection between art and freedom, the more complex the question gets. Eventually art is shown to be a product of essential human freedom. The world receives artwork and asks the artist, "Why did you do that?" and the answer is always, "Because I'm free to do and make what I like." That is where the anarchy comes in, because sometimes the police and legislators have different opinions about what people should do, or how free they actually are. For a case study, consider Banksy who is both a heralded artist and a known criminal. His artistic statement sometimes is that he is breaking the law, in many cases.
Political commentary
Not only does some art break cultural norms, laws, and expectations, it also comments on those norms, laws, and expectations. For instance, making an aesthetic that has not existed before (like a new genre of music, perhaps) is actually political commentary, but turned down. This imagery is informed by a specific abstract dynamic where art and culture are constantly striving for a limit that they never reach, always hinting at something that is impossible to capture. The thing hinted at is a political belief that humans are sovereign in their own lives.
