Liberals, fascists, and communists all tend to have different artistic preferences. Fascists like Duck Dynasty, liberals like Harry Potter, communists like Parasite. I know people are going to jump down my throat with that last one and there are subjective exceptions but I think you know what I mean. I loved the movie Us, for example, but a lib friend of mine said he "didn't get it." I felt the same after I watched the movie Snowpiercer back when I was a lib. The obvious class politics in that movie repelled me. (I haven't seen it since.)
I also have another idea I want to test out here. I think that the farther you get from the imperial core, the less interested people are in Star Trek / Star Wars. Both of these are basically outgrowths of the Western, so it probably applies to superhero movies too, since these are also just westerns with different costumes. The bad guys in cowboy movies are always the indigenous, and the indigenous are the ones who live in the Global South. Living in South Korea, I was fascinated at the seeming total lack of interest people there had in Star Wars and Star Trek. They also have no interest in Kurosawa movies, at least in my experience, since they aren't really too fond of samurai (and I know Kurosawa didn't just make samurai movies).
I'm out of time, so I'll just reiterate my question: are artistic preferences just another expression of politics / class? If you like or dislike a work of art, is that entirely because of your class or are there other factors?
a lot more people are just watching the movie than engaging with the art, especially when it comes to pop media, so it might not be a good test despite the huge sample size. two people can watch the same piece of media and enjoy it despite having wildly different takes on its supposed political subtext. like the whole thing where attempts at anti-war movies end up becoming the favorite movies of pro-war weirdos.
but to answer your question, actual artistic preferences (or even just aesthetic preferences) are not just derived from politics and class. while people often prefer media that affirms their worldview, emotional state and psychological history are absolutely exercising influence.
But can’t it be argued that emotional state and psychological history are also derived from class? Even if you want to say that someone has a mental illness due to genetics, might that also be a product of family / class history?
I'm sure it could be argued, but not by me and not convincingly.