In those excruciatingly rare instances and programs where it is taught properly, it is perhaps the most comprehensive of the liberal arts, encompassing aspects of anatomy, chemistry, engineering, literature, mythology, historical methods, social psychology, politics, etc. It demands scrupulous observation and the ability to communicate and defend one's analyses and conclusions.
Honestly, in the 30 years since I left college, I've not once had to identify a sculpture or date a painting in advancement of my professional life, but the research, writing and communication skills I developed in the discipline have been put to use virtually every single day.
Again, I do agree with the primary assertion of your post in that it ranks among the useless degrees out there; I'm just saying that it doesn't have to be, and frankly the responsibility for that is primarily on the academics in the field.
THe same with English.
I had The History of Art as an elective. It was the most BORING class I have had in my life.
The teacher was monotone (like the teacher in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off), and all he did was show pictures of all of the European sites he had visited, (monotone and slow) “this me me standing next to the Greek Pillars, and this is me in Rome looking at~”.
Within 5 minutes of class start 99% of us were snoring (I don’t think any of us made above a C :^/ ).
History was one of my favorite courses, and the teacher was excellent. I chose him for 2 semesters.
I have a friend whose wife has a Master’s in Art History. Her first job after receiving her degree was answering phones on the Suicide Hotline for $10/hour. But she was a very talented painter and nice person. Of course, me and him would laugh our asses off about that but then we are both Professional Engineers.