Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
AY
An Illutrated Guide to Arthur Danto’ “The
nd of Art”
5.2k
Tiernan Morgan & Lauren Purje
Shares March 31, 2015
In an oituar for the New York Time, Ken Johnon decried Arthur Danto (1924–2013) a “one of the
mot widel read art critic of the Potmodern era.” Danto, who wa oth a critic and a profeor of
philooph, i celerated for hi acceile and a ale proe. Depite thi, Danto’ et-known ea,
“The nd of Art,” continue to e cited more than it i undertood. What wa Danto’ argument? I art
reall over? And if o, what are the implication for art hitor and art-making?
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 1/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
Danto’ twin paion were art and philooph. He initiall emarked on a career a an artit (much of
hi work i now part of the Wane tate Univerit art collection) efore puruing an academic career
in philooph. In 1951, Danto egan teaching at Columia Univerit, earning hi doctorate the next
ear. He wa an art critic for The Nation etween 1984–2009 and wa a regular contriutor to
pulication uch a Artforum.
In 1964, Danto viited an exhiition of And Warhol’ rillo oxe at the tale Galler, New York. The
how changed hi life.
5.2k
Shares
Arthur Danto and And Warhol
It wan’t Warhol’ uject matter that hocked the philoopher, ut it form. Wherea Warhol’
painting of coke ottle and oup can were viual repreentation, the artit’ rillo ox culpture
— ilkcreened plwood facimile of actual rillo oxe — were virtuall inditinguihale from the
real thing. If one placed one of Warhol’ culpture eide a real rillo ox, who could tell the
di erence? What made one of the oxe an artwork and the other an ordinar oject? Danto outlined
hi concluion in an ea entitled “The Artworld” (1964):
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 2/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
What in the end make the di erence etween a rillo ox and a work of art coniting of a rillo
ox i a certain theor of art. It i theor that take it up into the world of art, and keep it from
collaping into the real oject which it i. [Warhol’ rillo oxe] could not have een art ft ear
ago. The world ha to e read for certain thing, the artworld no le than the real one. It i the role
of artitic theorie, thee da a alwa, to make the artworld, and art, poile.
entiall, Warhol’ rillo oxe are art ecaue the work ha an audience which undertand it via a
certain theor (to ue Danto’ term) of what art can e. The artworld (compried of critic, curator,
collector, dealer, etc.) pla a part in which theorie are emraced or nued. A Danto urmie,
“To ee omething a art require omething the ee cannot decr — an atmophere of artitic
theor, a knowledge of the hitor of art: an artworld.” Thi idea, later expanded upon the
5.2k
Shares
philoopher George Dickie, i alo popularl known a the Intitutional theor of art. The quetion
lingering in the ackground i how and wh thee o-called theorie change and develop over time.
Danto wa facinated hitorical change. What made Warhol’ rillo oxe acceptale a art in 1964?
What would Neo-claical painter Jacque-Loui David have thought of Warhol’ work? How would
Leonardo da Vinci, Phidia, or a caveman react? Do the rillo oxe repreent ome ort of art
hitorical progre? Wa art hitor heading in a dicernile direction? Danto’ invetigation into
hitor, progre, and art theor, coaleced into hi et-known ea, “The nd of Art.”
efore tackling “The nd of Art,” we need to rie conider how the hitor of art i traditionall
undertood.
Art hitor i generall thought of a a linear progreion of one movement or tle after another
(Romanticim, Realim, Impreionim, Pot-Impreionim, etc.), punctuated the in uence of
individual geniue (Delacroix, Couret, Monet, Cézanne … ).
Thi fundamental approach i the viual ai of ara Fanelli’ 40-meter-long timeline of 20th-centur
art (which wa formerl diplaed on the Tate Modern’ econd oor). The timeline pinpoint the
hitorical inception of particular movement, while alo naming ke hitoric artit (note how
Fanelli’ timeline trail o after the ear 2000. We’ll come ack to thi later).
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 3/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
5.2k
Shares
An illutration of ara Fanelli’ Tate timeline
Fanelli’ timeline i part of a long tradition of attempting to viuall map hitoric progreion, a
neulou and trick concept. The rt director of the Mueum of Modern Art, Alfred arr, famoul
deigned hi own timeline of 20th-centur art, a did George Maciuna, the founder of Fluxu
(Maciuna wa reall into diagram; he reportedl pent ve ear on hi incomplete 6 x 12–foot art
hitorical timeline). Thee timeline often implicitl upport certain idea aout what art i, what it
wa, and where it’ headed. One uch concept that appear regularl throughout the hitor of art
(aleit, in varing form), i mimei: the imitation and repreentation of realit.
Art hitorian have long argued that the ancient Greek ought to imitate the human od with ever
greater degree of veriimilitude, a model that wa reurrected during the Renaiance. Thi concept
hold that artit hould eek to mater the imitation of realit (the tor of the painting contet
etween Zeuxi and Parrhaiu tpi e thi ideal). A numer of earl art hitorian ought to
demontrate how variou artit had progreed (and in ome cae, tunted) thi ultimate goal, and
in doing o, engineered one of the dominant narrative of art hitor. The reult i a aic (and ver
reductive) interpretation of art hitor. ummed up crudel, it reemle omething like thi:
The craftman of the o-called Dark Age ‘forgot’ the mimetic kill and value of the ancient.
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 4/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
Claical ideal were then reurrected during the Renaiance and were contantl reevaluated up to
the late nineteenth centur. the earl 20th centur, art had fractured into a multitude of concurrent
movement.
The tor Danto tell in “The nd of Art” follow on from thi model. According to Danto, the
commitment to mimei egan to falter during the nineteenth centur due to the rie of photograph
and lm. Thee new perceptual technologie led artit to aandon the imitation of nature, and a a
reult, 20th-centur artit egan to explore the quetion of art’ own identit. What wa art? What
hould it do? How hould art e de ned? In aking uch quetion, art had ecome elf-conciou.
Movement uch a Cuim quetioned the proce of viual repreentation, and Marcel Duchamp
5.2k
exhiited a urinal a an artwork. The twentieth centur overaw a rapid ucceion of di
Shares erent
movement and ‘im,’ all with their own notion of what art could e. “All there i at the end,” Danto
wrote, “i theor, art having nall ecome vaporized in a dazzle of pure thought aout itelf, and
remaining, a it were, olel a the oject of it own theoretical concioune.”
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 5/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
Marcel Duchamp
Warhol’ rillo oxe and Duchamp’ readmade demontrated to Danto that art had no dicernile
direction in which to progre. The grand narrative of progreion — of one movement reacting to
another — had ended. Art had reached a pot-hitorical tate. All that remain i pure theor:
Of coure, there will go on eing art-making. ut art-maker, living in what I like to call the pot-
hitorical period of art, will ring into exitence work which lack the hitorical importance or
meaning we have for a long time come to expect […] The tor come to an end, ut not the
character, who live on, happil ever after doing whatever the do in their pot-narrational
5.2k inigni cance […] The age of pluralim i upon u…when one direction i a good a a another.
Shares
In hindight, it’ ea to ee how Danto egan to approach thi concluion during the 1960.
Movement uch a Pop art and Fluxu were activel reaking down the arrier etween art and the
everda. Relativit philoophie uch a pottructuralim and exitentialim were in full wing,
critiquing the narrative and certaintie which Wetern academia had previoul held dear. Having
lown open the de nition of what it could e, art had undermined it own elief in linear progreion.
After all, what movement or ‘im’ could logicall follow the dematerialization of the art oject
(conceptualim) or the pervaive kepticim of grand theorie and ideologie (potmodernim)?
Danto elieved that an uequent movement were noneential in that the would no longer
contriute to the puruit of art’ elf-de nition. “We are entering a more tale, more happ period of
artitic endeavor where the aic need to which art ha alwa een reponive ma again e met,” he
wrote. Although Danto claimed the end of art wan’t in itelf a ad thing, he nonethele appeared to
later lament it demie. In hi review of the 2008 Whitne iennial, Danto lamated the themele
tate of the artworld. “It i heading in no direction to peak of,” the philoopher wrote.
Whilt deviing “The nd of Art,” Danto wa “atonihed” to turn to one of the mot unlikeliet of
ource, the philooph of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831).
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 6/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
5.2k
Shares
Arthur Danto and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
Hegel’ philooph wa not in vogue during the ’60, ut hi teleological undertanding of
hitor erved a a ueful template for Danto’ concluion. Hegel undertood progre a an
overarching dialectic — a proce of elf realization and undertanding that culminate in pure
knowledge. Thi tate i ultimatel achieved through philooph, though it i initiall preceded an
interrogation into the qualitie of religion and art. A Danto ummarized in a later ea entitled “The
Dienfranchiement of Art” (1984):
When art internalize it own hitor, when it ecome elf-conciou of it hitor a it ha come to
e in our time, o that it concioune of it hitor form part of it nature, it i perhap
unavoidale that it hould turn into philooph at lat. And when it doe o, well, in an important
ene, art come to an end.
Danto i not the onl philoopher to have adopted an Hegelian dialectic. oth Franci Fukuama and
Karl Marx utilized Hegelianim to reach their own hitorical concluion. Fukuama argued that
lieral democrac and free market capitalim repreented the zenith of Wetern civilization, whilt
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 7/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
Marx argued that communim would replace capitalim (neither of thee development have quite
panned out).
ara Fanelli’ timeline appear to validate Danto’ concluion. After the ear 2000, there are no
movement or -im, onl individual artit. The movement that are lited toward the end of the
centur aren’t reall movement at all. The term “YA” (Young ritih Artit) i a ueful catch-all for
a divere group of artit, ome of whom happened to go to the ame chool (Goldmith). Likewie,
“intallation” i not a movement ut a mean of preenting art. Recent term uch a “zomie
formalim” (aka zomie atraction) appear to con rm that we are living in an age of pot-hitorical
malaie.
5.2k
Shares
(Zomie) Clement Greenerg
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 8/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
Though widel read, Danto’ theorie are not wholl eloved the art indutr. Artit don’t
necearil want to hear that their work ha no developmental potential. Danto’ work alo preent a
challenge for the art market which relie on perceived hitoric importance a a unique elling point.
He predicted that the demand on the market would require the “illuion of unending novelt,” later
citing 1980 Neo-xpreionim a an example of the indutr’ need to continuall reccle and
repackage prior aethetic form and idea, a charge that parallel the contemporar deate regarding
zomie formalim.
Danto’ critic tpicall challenge the philoopher’ reliance on traditional art hitorical model. In
Danto and Hi Critic ( rt pulihed in 1993) Roert C. olomon and Kathleen M. Higgin dicu the
5.2k
“fallac of linear hitor,” namel that our pre-dominant art hitorical narrative are largel a product
Shares
of their retelling:
A a peron (or a culture) get older, the tor get olidi ed and emellihed in the retelling; and of
coure, it get longer. arl incident and event are recat with forward-looking meaning the could
not have poil have had at the time.
If one reject the developmental, Wetern art narrative that Danto decrie in “The nd of Art,” then
the tructure required for Danto’ Hegelian undertanding of art collape.
It’ important to recognize that art hitor i largel uilt upon the iae and ujective opinion of
other. Giorgio Vaari (1511–1574), the o-called father of art hitor and author of The Live of the Mot
xcellent painter, culptor, and Architect (1550), famoul favored Florentine artit over thoe
working in Northern urope. Over the coure of the twentieth-centur, the art hitorical perpective
of academic uch a rnet Gomrich, Heinrich Wöl in, and rwin Panofk were rigoroul
reaeed. Claical cholar have ince prolematized the mimetic interpretation of ancient Greek
art. Mot contemporar medieval cholar reject the term “Dark Age” for example, ince it i
implicitl judgmental and ignore the fact that earl Chritian art had a completel di erent et of
aethetic prioritie. The hitor of art ecome far more nuanced and complex when tudied in
microcom. When one conider the wealth of methodologie availale to art hitorian (Iconograph,
emiotic, pchoanali, and o forth), Danto’ concluion look all the more narrow and reductive.
Danto alo convenientl exclude work which challenge hi art hitorical thei, namel non-Wetern
art. How do Japanee printmaker — whoe perpectival and mimetic prioritie di ered radicall from
Wetern tandard — t into Danto’ art hitorical narrative? Danto doe mention Japanee print in
“The nd of Art,” although the quetion of how the impact hi developmental interpretation of art
hitor i completel idetepped. “We have to decide whether [Japanee print maker] had a di erent
pictographic culture or impl were retarded technological lowne in achieving oliditie,” Danto
wrote.
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 9/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
5.2k
Shares
Depite thee criticim, Danto’ upporter argue that hi theorie are vindicated a perceptile
lack of direction in the art world. It could e argued that Danto’ concluion hold up, even after one
dipene with hi Hegelian framework. Ha art merel paralzed itelf overanalzing the coure of
hitor? How can we ever adequatel predict the future from the vantage of the preent? Danto
directl addree thi dilemma at the tart of “The nd of Art”:
In 1952, the mot advanced gallerie were howing Pollock, De Kooning, Gottlie, and Klein, which
would have een temporall unimaginale in 1882. Nothing o much elong to it own time a an
age’ glimpe into the future: uck Roger carrie the decorative idiom of the 1930 into the
twent- rt centur … the cience ction novel of the 1950 project the exual moralit of the
ienhower era […] The future i a kind of mirror in which we can how onl ourelve, though it
eem to u a window through which we ma ee thing to come.
Or a Danto quote Leonardo da Vinci, ogni dipintore dipinge e (“ever painter paint himelf ”).
comment (13)
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 10/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 11/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 12/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 13/14
12/02/2017 An Illustrated Guide to Arthur Danto’s "The End of Art"
http://hyperallergic.com/191329/anillustratedguidetoarthurdantostheendofart/ 14/14