The question as to what constitutes art is hardly a contemporary one. Today, artists exist whose main goal seems only to subvert work that no longer warrants the trite tag "cutting edge". Once the proverbial envelope is pushed even further, the public inevitably scratches its collective head-or furrows the collective brow- thinking that this time the "artists" have gone too far. That very same admixture of contempt and conclusion, however, was not unknown in Michelangelo's day; only what was considered blasphemous, art-wise, in the 16th Century, would today be considered tame.
Can anyone explain what is the overall meaning of the sentence in relation to the bold parts?
