"Character is that which reveals moral purpose, exposing the class of things a man chooses or avoids”

"Imperfectly beheld.

The lady dare not lift her veil

For fear it be dispelled.

But peers beyond her mesh,

And wishes, and denies,

Lest interview annul a want

That image satifies"- Emily Dickinson"

People in society generally agree that this is type of poetry is 'high art'

But what makes this high art and not the music that we hear today?

Does a song by the arctic monkeys class as high art?

Probably not...

I think the time has an effect on this, Emily Dickinson died in 1886.
Her poems therefore were around over 125 years ago.

I also think that class has a huge effect

Emily's family were pillars of the local community, they lived in a mansion in Amherst.

Alex turner was a boy from Sheffield who created a band that consists of his neighbours and school mates.

I think the type of people that appreciate the art determines whether it is seen as high or low art.

Does this then mean that it isn't high art, surely the actual intelligence level should be the determination for whether it is seen as high or low art?

If the intelligence is there why should it matter about how much money that person owns or where their property lays.

But does high art come with time?

People are seen as 'legends' when they die

Maybe the high art like Emily Dickinson's poems where given similar roles in society to how some bands are seen today.

Or it could be age defined, do the older generation see historical poetry as high art, and modern day music as low art?