Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Continuity or Break: Danto and Gadamer on the Crisis of Anti-Aestheticism

Continuity or Break: Danto and Gadamer on the Crisis of Anti-Aestheticism JAMES Introduction: The Philosophical Problem of Modern Art According to Arthur Danto, the crisis of modern art is not the abandonment of representation, nor an attempt at intentional "uglification," but a struggle to escape the aesthetic objectification of artworks.1 This attempt at escape has led modern artists to hold an indifferent attitude toward beauty, an attitude that has resulted in the readymade: in Duchamp's famous urinal and snow shovel, and Warhol's perhaps more famous soup can. Danto's account of this crisis in art is plausible--for what is one to say vis-à-vis the beauty of objects in art galleries whose twins reside in washrooms and cupboards?-- and if accepted identifies a related crisis in philosophy. From Plato to Schopenhauer, philosophers have largely approached the topic of art in relation to, or even as derivative of, the topic of beauty. The question for philosophers, teachers, and students of art, if art and aesthetic considerations have parted company, is what shall we say now? The purpose of this paper is to contrast the answer of Danto with the answer of Gadamer. Both of these philosophers take the modern, anti-aesthetic turn of art seriously, but they adopt contrasting approaches to the question. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Journal of Aesthetic Education University of Illinois Press

Continuity or Break: Danto and Gadamer on the Crisis of Anti-Aestheticism

The Journal of Aesthetic Education , Volume 45 (2) – Sep 29, 2011

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-illinois-press/continuity-or-break-danto-and-gadamer-on-the-crisis-of-anti-kDJduwMZYQ

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
University of Illinois Press
Copyright
Copyright © University of Illinois Press
ISSN
1543-7809
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

JAMES Introduction: The Philosophical Problem of Modern Art According to Arthur Danto, the crisis of modern art is not the abandonment of representation, nor an attempt at intentional "uglification," but a struggle to escape the aesthetic objectification of artworks.1 This attempt at escape has led modern artists to hold an indifferent attitude toward beauty, an attitude that has resulted in the readymade: in Duchamp's famous urinal and snow shovel, and Warhol's perhaps more famous soup can. Danto's account of this crisis in art is plausible--for what is one to say vis-à-vis the beauty of objects in art galleries whose twins reside in washrooms and cupboards?-- and if accepted identifies a related crisis in philosophy. From Plato to Schopenhauer, philosophers have largely approached the topic of art in relation to, or even as derivative of, the topic of beauty. The question for philosophers, teachers, and students of art, if art and aesthetic considerations have parted company, is what shall we say now? The purpose of this paper is to contrast the answer of Danto with the answer of Gadamer. Both of these philosophers take the modern, anti-aesthetic turn of art seriously, but they adopt contrasting approaches to the question.

Journal

The Journal of Aesthetic EducationUniversity of Illinois Press

Published: Sep 29, 2011

There are no references for this article.