>
>^this is a personal value. it may not seem like it because
>many people share this romanticized view, but it is undeniably
>subjective. I'm not sure transcending time actually dictates
>an objective good. Do you think you can have objectivity
>without the weight of any kind of precedent or context?

I was explaining the historical/contextual background to the Renaissance. It is not my opinion or value, it is what happened. A piece of objective art that is good, that transcends time, culture, race, creed, etc. is not just loved by one or two people. It is felt by many, in the same way we can feel awe struck by observing a giant waterfall or an ocean.

Nature is a clear example of objectivity that has no cultural, or even "human" defined context. It is loved and appreciated by many and can exist independently of us completely. It is probably the best example there is.

As far as human art without precedent or context, I would say the Pyramid of Giza is a pretty strong candidate. It is a basic shape of awe inspiring size, shrouded in complete mystery, which fills you with wonder by the sheer sight of it. The commonly accepted explanation of its construction has been debunked, and the mystery remains unsolved.