Who Decides What Becomes a Masterpiece?

The concept of a masterpiece is often shrouded in mystery, with various individuals and institutions influencing its formation. From ancient manuscripts to contemporary art, the criteria for what constitutes a masterpiece are multifaceted and continually evolving.

Preserving the Past: Before the Printing Press

Before the advent of the printing press, the preservation and dissemination of texts were the primary responsibilities of scribes and manuscript copyists. In the pre-printing age, creating multiple copies of a manuscript was a labor-intensive process, requiring significant time and resources. These meticulous scribes made informed judgments about which works deserved stringent duplication and preservation. The preservation of texts like Sophocles' Oedipus Rex can be attributed to the consistent efforts of these dedicated scribes over generations. Without their crucial work, we would lack the texts necessary to make such judgements today.

The Challenge of the Modern Publishing Era

The transition into the modern era of easy printing introduced an additional layer of complexity to the question of what constitutes a masterpiece. While classics like Romeo and Juliet of Shakespeare continue to captivate audiences and generate substantial revenue, not all of his works share the same level of popularity and critical acclaim. Consider the case of Timon of Athens, which, despite being a part of the same literary canon, has not garnered the same attention as other plays.

The emergence of academic criticism in the 20th century further complicated the matter. Scholars and educators began to influence the selection process, often favoring authors from specific backgrounds, such as those that aligned with prevailing power structures within academia. For instance, many white male university professors at the beginning of the 20th century were more inclined to study authors that resonated with them, predominantly white male authors. This bias led to an uneven distribution of attention and acclaim across the literary landscape.

The Expansion of Academic Perspectives

Fortunately, in recent years, there has been a broadening of perspectives within academia. The academic world is now more inclusive, embracing diverse voices and works that may have previously been overlooked. This shift reflects a growing recognition of the rich tapestry of literary and artistic contributions, ensuring that a wider array of works is considered worthy of critical study and appreciation.

Beyond Academia: The Universality of Art

From a broader perspective, beyond the academic realm, the question of what constitutes a masterpiece takes on a different dimension. Art, in all its forms—from literature, music, images, theatre, and dance—exists primarily to engage and inspire its audience. Whether or not a work of art is deemed a masterpiece by an academic or critic is largely irrelevant to its intrinsic value. A work of art, when it resonates with a viewer, reader, or listener, holds its own form of mastery. Conversely, a work that fails to engage its audience can still be valuable for its own unique reasons.

In conclusion, the determination of what will be considered a masterpiece is a dynamic and multifaceted process, shaped by historical context, academic influence, and individual artistic merit. As we continue to refine our understanding of what constitutes a masterpiece, we must remember that the true value of art lies in its ability to connect with and impact the lives of those who experience it.