Response to Blog- Art

In her blog Shelby posted Clive Bell writes that "A good critic may be able to make me see in a picture that had left me cold things that I had overlooked, till at last, receiving the emotion, I recognise it as a work of art. ...But it is useless for a critic to tell me that something is a work of art; he must make me feel it for myself" (119). Do you agree with this?

To be honest I do agree with this for a variety of reasons. The main reason being you can't tell a person to like something or how to feel about something and expect it to just happen. The person has to like it because they like and not because they are expected to. An example of this could take us back to childhood. As a child I am sure that your parents, primarily your mothers, expected you to eat vegetables. They expected you to like it and eat it all the time, hey they liked it, and it was good for you . Just because they liked it and expected us to like it doesn't mean we did, right? (We just pretended to eat it and chucked it off our plate when they weren't looking). For the sake of art, a person can point things out to me about that particular piece which I may have overlooked and then ALAS! I am aware of something that I wasn't aware of before and end up liking the work of art.
It is like enjoying poetry or an abstract movie for the first time, you don't understand the components of it and/or the purpose so you hate the piece presented before you. However, it isn't until someone who is knowledgeable of the work or who understands the work explains it to you pointing things out that your opinion may change(or it may not). A person wouldn't be effective in saying "like this movie, it is good and insightful or like the poem it is seriously profound." If I am not feeling these things, it cannot be forced on me. There is a difference between being helpful in pointing things out and being obnoxious in trying to force me to like something. With that said my question is, what is theory and why does it exist?