Interesting. But. The old complaint about the apparent dichotomy between art and commercial success is, I think, a misconception, as if they are enemies. Depending on your definition of what art is and what its purpose should be, we can agree that art is a vehicle for ideas. Now, the broader the audience, the better, right? Hence, what you are really talking about is not commercial success (which I think is ONE of the measures of a piece of art: the more success, the more classic, universal and relevant the conveyed idea is). For example, the Divina Commedia has been commercial successes back then. What you are talking about is, I think, the bottom-up, survey-based, MBA-executives fed and high-concepted productions that really stretches the definition of art. In conclusion, the problem is not the commercialization of art, is that we call art something that just isn’t.