"Finger-painting and the Experts"

The reading entitled “Mass Society/Popular Culture Debate: A Historical Overview” made some interesting points and got me thinking. Amongst all the hype over what popular culture is doing to elite art, Edward Shils finally speaks what was on my mind in saying “…much of what is labeled “high culture” is extremely mediocre in quality.” The reading defines the elite art as “consisting of technically complex and thematically unique creative forms that are produced…in accordance with (or opposition to) an accepted canon of works and within a conscious aesthetic standard.” I’d now like to bring to your attention a wonderful 20/20 segment on March 11th entitled “You Call that Art?” in which high culture was challenged. ABCNews.com showed four reproductions of modern art works that are considered great along with six pieces that were not. Four of the six art works in the test were done by 4-year-olds, and when their artwork was shown on the Web, and shown to people at the mall, the kids' work ranked ahead of most of the masterpieces.
“I assumed real artists wouldn't fall for the trick, so we invited some to take our test. Most of them also put at least some of the kids' work up there with the masters. One artist, Victor Acevedo, described one of the children's pieces as "a competent execution of abstract expressionism which was first made famous by de Kooning and Jackson Pollock and others. So it's emulating that style and it's a school of art." When I told him the work was done by a 4-year-old he said, "That's amazing. Give that kid a show." More than 1,800 people said their work was great art.”
Perhaps this could validate me asking how anything can be “debased” if it’s label is in the eye of the beholder?