This is interesting--they don't say "Look at great paintings and you'll find they're wonderful". The idea is that you need to be told what's wonderful or worth looking at, and it will....what? Change your tastes? Is the goal to give people theories to know what's wrong with Kincaide's paintings so that they'll stop enjoying them? Does it really work that way?
After all, a great many people think he's a great artist because they're delighted by his paintings, not because Kincaide's paintings match their theories about art.
My taste in fiction has changed somewhat over the years, but I'm not sure why--it hasn't been the result of formal study. I can enjoy good prose more than I used to, though I admit it's usually not for very long at a time. Still, I get occasional fits of reading something where I feel "What a great sentence. Look, here comes another one!" Nonetheless, I still haven't finished reading _Bad Magic_ even though the prose  is considerably better than I see in most fantasy.
I bounced off _The DaVinci Code_ because of the prose--a lot of people say they know it's bad, but they get pulled in anyway. On the other hand, I still like Laurel Hamilton.
Anyway, I'm curious about whether anyone's got a story of their taste improving, whether by being better able to appreciate the high end or by losing interest in the low end. Did taking courses or reading books on the subject make a difference? Exposure to the good stuff? Getting sick of the bad stuff?
If anyone would like to see a bunch of Monet paintings up close, I recommend The Philadelphia Museum of Art. Kincaide gets compared to Monet, and I'd be curious about what Kincaide fans think after they've seen some Monets.
 I say "prose" rather than "writing" because I've found that many people use "writing" to mean everything about the story, and "prose" is the only word I've got for observing what's going on at the sentence level.
Kincaide link thanks to supergee.