The Autonomy and Oppression of Art in Arthur C. Danto's "The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art"
Abstrakt
The aim of my presentation is to consider the idea of the autonomy from the point of view of the analytical philosopher Arthur C. Danto.
I shall consider his essay "The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art". In this essay, Danto asserts that art was oppressed by philosophy.
Although the term autonomy is not explicitly mentioned, it is present in the background. The essay seems provocative as Danto insists that aesthetics was designed as a means of disenfranchisement of art.
I shall argue that he is wrong on this point. At first, I explain Danto's idea of philosophical disenfranchisement and sketch two strategies he distinguishes: ephemeralization and takeover.
I will pay more attention to the first strategy because it is connected to the aesthetic experience. For the purpose of my argument I consider Edward Bullough's article "Psychical Distance as a Factor in Art and Aesthetic Principle" and I shall argue that the psychical distance is a means of engagement with art.
Subsequently, I shall compare this interpretation with Danto's. If my interpretation is correct, Danto's argument that the aesthetics is a strategy of disenfranchisement of art fails.