A thread in the General Photography Forum triggered this question minus a financial component brought up in that discussion and that is; why do people generally distrust things labeled Art and more specific to this discussion, photography that is labeled Art? I realize these are generalizations, but a couple of observations: Ive noticed in many Photo.net, threads, a frequent rejection of Art photography as opposed to images that are so-called real / legitimate / street / unadulterated / straight, or whatever adjective youd like to add. But, that may have more to do with a traditional view of photographs and semantics and therefore may not be pertinent to the question. Perhaps more meaningful is both on and away from this site, I often see an appreciation for things pretty (paintings, drawings, photos whatever), but a rejection of challenging or provocative pictures. In essence, there seems to be an unwillingness to accept images requiring intellectual consideration...often a component in things labeled Art. At the risk of answering my own question, is it because the average viewer has virtually no Art context in which to place images that might be more challenging than pictures seen on calendars? A few years ago, a museum did a survey and discovered the average person (American) could only name 5 artists and they were all dead. I think they were: Michelangelo, Picasso, Monet, Rembrandt and DiVinci. No matter. The point is, their collective body of work has long been accepted and has become part of western culture's iconography. Has it become accepted because over the years the intellectual components have been wrung out? There is yet another issue that was raised by Tom Wolfe in his book, The Painted Word. His argument is whatever is considered Art is decided by an elite few who run the major museums and galleries around the world. As a side issue, he rejects abstract and other work he deems not requiring high skill. Read that as anything not immediately identifiable. BTW, no matter what your point of view is, his book is a wonderful and quick read. So what raises this distrust: is it laziness; a lack of context; distrust of the Art establishment; a dumbing down of the society; the feeling of being excluded; something else? As someone who is always looking at Art and searches out thought provoking images, I realize my possible answers are in some ways prejudiced. None-the-less, I still think it's an interesting question. What say you?