The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art and The State of the Art by Arthur C. Danto. [REVIEW]Alexander Nehamas – – Journal of Philosophy The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art has 73 ratings and 8 reviews. Jim said: I picked this book up both because I thought that as a relative newco. Philosophical Disenfranchisement in Danto’s. “The End of Art”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism Fall In , Arthur C. Danto wrote two.
|Published (Last):||11 June 2005|
|PDF File Size:||14.42 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.73 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art
Reviews might weU be empirical diat Hamlet, as student, is a great talker radier than the necessary contradiction that Calderwood assumes. A simUar criticism applies to die dantk chapter, where a concern for murder as a sexual act seems almost arbitrarily placed on Macbeth because die writer now wishes to write on diat play rather dian on, say, Othello.
Nor is Calderwood much concerned to envisage the play, and draw his aesthetics from that picture. Calderwood’s work over two decades is, unfortunately, a microcosm of die subjection of material to the inner logic of critical taste, diat at times places itself firmly in line for the increasingly ridiculous category of a renascent scholasticism: The seven at times quite closely related essays coUected here were aU originaUy prepared as lecture presentations, and they very much exemplify this form of philospphical at its best.
The central concern is making sense of recent art and art history, and doing so against the idea that art has in some philoxophical way actuaUy “come to an end of its history.
Along die way a great many other subjects come in for some attention too: To read Danto on any topic in philosophical aesthetics is invariably to emerge with one’s sense of that topic enlarged. How is Danto’s “end of art thesis” to be understood?
That art has a history of some kind is obvious; how diis history is to be described is not. Croce’s ahistorical account of art as expression arose precisely because a once seemingly unchaUengeable “progressive” account of art’s history, art as die gradual “conquest of natural appearances” became, suddenly, utterly untenable before the sort of art produced after impressionism. But as Danto shrewdly observes, ifexpressionism succeeds because it offers a general account of aU art, this is also its faUure.
Any such general account must find it puzzling, ifnot inexplicable, why die history of art has generated a sequence of aestiietic movements, each one of which “seemed to require some kind of theoretical understanding to which the language and psychology of emotions seemed less and less adequate” p.
Clearly, self-consciousness about the history ofart and how one might plausibly continue in that history has shaped artistic production in the deepest way in die modern era. Yet how is diis history to be described? Danto looks to Hegel for die appropriate model: Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.
Arthur Danto – Wikipedia
Contact Contact Us Help.