School of Saatchi

Just been watching school of Saatchi episodes, got one to go, and its all well and good for those of us who don't like to pretend that art is more revolutionary than revolution, in other words since it's emergence not too long ago in history, a few hundred years ago, all art has been bourgeois, and it still is, which is not saying it doesn't act with the breaks at the top or near it, but if we were to look at this like in another way, and I'm not saying we need to, then are there not times in history too when artists, following like they do, but in a leading kind of way, and not far behind the real radicals, realign themselves to that latent potential order, for example between the 16th and 17th centuries in England didn't the most creative, unconsciously or openly, make work which reflected the concerns and excitements of the dangerous undercurrent of that period, the merchants, the traders, the individualists, whether they really wanted to or not?