We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and in the sho

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. - Irrelevant.
(B) The value of a contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured. - CORRECT.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next. - Out of scope
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness. - Goes in opposite directions.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular cotemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great. - Out of scope.

Author initially is support of critics but for short term only. From there author changes his/her stand and by giving a reasoning goes against short term objective judgement.

IMO Answer B.