Here's where you're going to run into issues with your analogy.  There are lots of people in music, for instance, who are widely regarded as geniuses, but are not popular.  There are also people who couldn't compose their way out of kindergarten and end up with millions of people loving their songs.  What is the purpose of music?  Is it to make compositional advances, or to entertain people?  I can let you listen to some music with cutting edge compositional techniques that sound like shit.  I can let you hear some of the best musicians in the world playing incredibly difficult music that you'll hate.

In short, the purpose of art, while not completely arbitrary, is somewhat subjective.  Therefore, any statement about a particular piece of art being better or worse is going to be necessarily subjective, where natural selection has concrete results.  So, not only are you dealing with memes, which are not truth-dependent, you're also dealing with art, which, if you haven't noticed, is damn hard to even define, much less objectively evaluate.