Abstract
In this presentation I will consider Arthur C. Danto's idea about the end of art.
This thesis is often identified with Hegel's reflection on art as a thing of the past presented in his Aesthetics. Lectures on Fine Art.
Although Danto mentions Hegel quite frequently, I shall argue against this view that a philosophical source of his thesis is the philosophy of history. Moreover, I believe that the philosophy of history serves as the source of the thesis in two ways.
On the one hand, Danto's terminology is based on his own account of the philosophy of history introduced in his eponymous Analytical Philosophy of History.On the other hand, the end-of-art thesis makes sense only with respect to a particular interpretation of general history, in Danto's essay represented by philosophies of the end of history. In the first part of my presentation, I will consider Danto's Analytical Philosophy of History.
Although Danto aimed to offer an alternative account to Carl Hempel's idea on explanation in history in this book, he developed key terms 'narrative' and 'narrative sentence' here both of which Danto uses when thinking about the end of art or end of art history. In the second part of the presentation, I will examine the end-of-art thesis as proposed in Danto's 'The End of Art' as well as in texts which further develop it.
I will pay attention especially to the Framework in which the thesis makes sense, i.e. to historical accounts of the end of history as interpreted by Danto. Even though Danto associates this vision of history with Marx and Hegel, my aim is to demonstrate that his interpretation of the end of history is based on further reading, specifically on Alexandre Kojève's commentary on Hegel and on Josiah Royce's interpretation of Hegel Phenomenology in terms of Bildungsroman.
I will claim that these philosophers shaped Danto's idea on the end of art, even though Danto's interpretation of their position differs from their original. I believe that these two steps enable to prove that the philosophical source of Danto's end-of-art thesis is not Hegel's Aesthetics but rather a philosophy of history.
Not only makes this interpretation the correct understanding of Danto's position possible but it also explains the difference between Danto's and Hegel's notion of the end of art.