We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and in the short term they are, since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time, the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of Bach, and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach, and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of a contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next.
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular cotemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.

concur with A. Author is saying that initially, critics will argue about a work , but after a long time, they agree on calling it great. He cites the examples of Bach et all, so it must mean that back in the day, critics must have disagreed about those individuals work.

ill go for A...why B...someone explain plz...

It still doesn't make sense to me!

We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and in the short term they are, since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time, the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of Bach, and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach, and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of a contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next.
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular cotemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.

Let me put it like this...the question asked is: The statements above best support "which of the following (as a )conclusion"?

Now we know either A or B is the answer: let us put "therefore"(concluding word--- any other concluding word also wuld do) to the two statements and see:

We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and in the short term they are, since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time, the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of Bach, and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.Therefore..When Michelangelo, Bach, and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work...???

We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and in the short term they are, since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time, the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of Bach, and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.Therefore..The value of a contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.

Option B provides with a sentence which can be appropriately be derieved as a conclusion for the evidence stated..but A doesnt...

So according to me B is the OA and makes more reasonable..