>Well, I sometimes wonder... if everyone in the whole world forgot about artists like Picasso, could the masses still be convinced his art is good in modern tim

>Well, I sometimes wonder... if everyone in the whole world forgot about artists like Picasso, could the masses still be convinced his art is good in modern times? I for one would be pretty unimpressed with most of his work I mean... probably? "The masses" aren't the only judges of art, although broad appeal does count for some of it. Go see the documentary "The Art of the Steal" about the Barnes Foundation and its founder, who purchased a trove of post-Impressionist work in the early 20th century. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnes_Foundation#Notable_holdings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnes_Foundation#Notable_hold...) The Philadelphia high society art snobs of the time thought all that stuff was grotesque. Yet Barnes, a chemist of working-class background and sparse art education, assembled a collection that the "critics" would eventually recognize as masterpieces. Art we would call "realist" (a term which begs the question) always impresses people. There's nothing wrong with that. But it's good that that is not the totality of human expression.