In Response to Jacob's First Question (Week 5)

I do not think that Bell is an elitist because although he made strong implications that those who are more knowledgeable about aesthetics (the process of creating it, intended meanings and emotions from the artist, history, etc.) are able to make more accurate judgments about the value of the work, he also makes implications that any individual who is interested enough in the subject is able to reach this level of superiority in reference to aesthetic judgment simply through the processes of taking the time to increase his or her knowledge in this specific topic. Elitism can be a great fault in a theory especially in theories having to do with something so subjective such aesthetics because the concept of subjectivity revolves around the idea that the object at hand is going to hold a different meaning and value to every viewer. Two individuals could be highly educated of an art piece in the same manner but still have two distinctly different views on the work despite their expertise. With this concept in mind, I do not think that an aesthetic theory can be both elitist and correct simply due to the variability in opinions that most works of art produce (although this may not hold true to theories on other topics). A theory may become viciously elitist when it begins to dismiss other points of view or theories as less important due to the assumed lack of correct knowledge expressed by another. What are some topics or theories where elitism would be beneficial?