No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
In "The End of Art," 1 Arthur Danto prophetically announces the end of art history as we know it with the arrival of Andy Warhol's Brillo Box.But, when you think about it, his suggestion seems very strange.True, art exhibits a rampant, unguided pluralism.However, the mere existence of pluralism seems no more to support the end of art history than it does to suggest that we have simply entered into yet another phase of art history.The pronouncement of art history's end with Brillo Box is even more puzzling when we recall that Brillo Box also makes possible Danto's definition of art.Prima facie, there is a tension between the fact that the arrival of Brillo Box makes possible Danto's definition of art and the fact that the arrival of Brillo Box also marks the end of art.After all, of what use is a definition of art, if it is possible only after art has ended?My project has two parts: (1) Noël Carroll has argued, against Danto, that the latter uses his end-of-art thesis in an illicitly circular way. 2 The reason is that Danto uses the thesis to indemnify his own essentialist theory of art against the possibility of future counterexamples.I shall argue that Danto's end-of-art thesis does not presuppose any essentialist theory of art.(2) In the second part, I shall go on to argue that, on Danto's own terms, art history cannot come to an end anyway-contrary to his claim.3 I.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.