"The theory of beauty as the absolute creation of artifex deus, enabling every man (worthy of the name) to mimic the divine act of creation, is no doubt the ‘natural’ expression of the occupational ideology of those who like to call themselves ‘creators’, which explains why, even without any direct influence, it has constantly been reinvented by artists, from Leonardo da Vinci, who made the artist ‘the master of all things’, to Klee, who aimed to create as nature does. And- quite apart from its clear relationship with the antithesis between the two forms of aesthetic pleasure, and through this, with the opposition between the cultured elite and the ‘barbarous’ masses- the opposition Kant establishes between ‘free art’, ‘which is agreeable on its own account and in no way constrains the beholder - and mercenary art’, a servile activity ‘only attractive by means of what is results in (e.g., the pay), which is consequently capable of being a compulsory imposition’ whose product forces itself on the beholder with the enslaving violence of its sensible charms, very directly expresses Kant’s conception of the position of ‘pure’ or ‘autonomous’ intellectuals in the division of labour, and more precisely in the division of intellectual labour. These ‘pure’ intellectuals are… none other than philosophy professors… but artists and writers would no doubt be the purest of all.”
Bourdieu, Pierre. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1984. Print.