Danto inicia su filosofía de la historia del arte con un núcleo problemático que inaugura el modernismo: una obra de arte llega a ser indiscernible de una mera cosa, en la medida en que es el resultado lógico de la narrativa de un cierto periodo. Hablar sobre el fin del arte es hablar de las razones que sustentan esa narración y de la posibilidad de su culminación. Se propone una crítica, a partir de la relación entre esencialismo, historicismo y pluralismo, (...) para examinar su controversial tesis sobre la clausura histórica del arte por agotamiento de su impulso cognitivo. Danto begins his philosophy of the history of art with the problematic issue that characterizes modernism: a work of art becomes indiscernible from a mere thing insofar as it is the logical result of the narrative of a certain period. To speak of the end of art is to speak of the reasons that support such narrative and the possibility of its culmination. The article proposes a critique on the basis of the relation among essentialism, historicism, and pluralism, in order to examine Danto's controversial thesis regarding the historical end of art due to the exhaustion of its cognitive impulse. (shrink)

En este trabajo, partiendo de un experimento mental y de una exégesis del concepto de representación artística en la obra de Arthur Danto, mostraremos que hay serias dificultades para trazar una distinción de carácter esencialista entre representaciones artísticas y científicas. Negando la posibilidad de establecer dicha distinción y considerando la diferencia en cuestiones de uso y aplicación, cuestionaremos la necesidad de una teoría general de la representación científica y destacaremos, por el contrario, la importancia de la reflexión respecto de otros (...) problemas asociados al uso de representaciones en la práctica científica, a saber, aquellos ligados con preguntas de carácter normativo. (shrink)

This paper examines the hitherto neglected resonance between Danto's and Derrida's concepts of the Artworld and the Frame. In doing so, I challenge prevalent understandings of Danto's theoretical framework, highlighting the necessary instability that he integrates into his definition of the art object. Equally, I emphasise the applicability of Derrida's deconstructive concept to the concrete conditions of contemporary artistic practice. I begin by examining the tensions present in Danto's definitional approach, as it demands a complex vision of Artworld relations. I (...) then consider how the ontologically constitutive character of Danto's Artworld may be re-examined through Derrida's concept of the parergon, as a supplementary techné that is fundamentally unstable and fragmented. Through this comparative reading I show that despite their different approaches, Danto's and Derrida's philosophies of art advance similar ontological conclusions. I thus argue that while their differences should not be minimised, our understanding of Danto's and Derrida's aesthetic concepts is enriched through recognition of their unforeseen correspondences. (shrink)

Resumen: Una de las problemáticas más recurrente y también más importante para el mundo del arte del siglo XX, tanto el filosófico como el de los artistas, fue la salida de la belleza como el único relato legitimador de un objeto del que se pretendía el estatus de arte. En tal sentido, la reflexión que Arthur Coleman Danto, filósofo del arte norteamericano, ha hecho carrera como una de las posturas teóricas para enfrentarse al arte después de la belleza y, además, (...) para sustentar la necesidad de una definición del mismo a pesar de la entropía propia del siglo XX, que implicó el advenimiento del arte como producción humana determinada tanto por la belleza como por la fealdad, el asco, la industria y un largo etcétera.: One of the problems not only more recurrent but also more important to the world of art of the 20th century, both the philosophical and the artists, was the departure of beauty as the only legitimizing account of an object which is intended to the status of art. In this sense, the reflection that Arthur Coleman Danto, philosopher of American art, it has made a career as one of the theoretical positions to confront the art after the beauty and, in addition, to support the need for a definition of the same despite the entropy of the 20th century, which meant the advent of art as a human production already determined not only for beauty but for the ugliness, the repugnance, the industry and a long etcetera. (shrink)

The striking title The End of Art managed to draw attention to the philosophical work of Arthur Danto. However, the lack of a systematic development which could support this thesis made him face harsh criticism. However, strong foundations for his statements can be deduced from his writings. In this paper, I analyse how to understand the thesis of the ‘end of art’. It should be approached not as a monolitical notion but as a complex concept that combines three different senses: (...) 1) the ‘end of art’ in the Hegelian sense: the conversion of art into philosophy, 2) the ‘end of art’ in the historiographical sense: as the end to the narratives of the history of art, and 3) the ‘end of art’ as the beginning of a new period in history, where Danto’s philosophy of art would be fully valid. (shrink)

The place that Arthur Danto gives to history, as constitutive to as and our world, as well as a discipline able to produce knowledge of the past, reach its cenit with his philosophy of art. In “the End of Art”, Danto announces an end of the history of the search of the philosophical definition of art and the beginning of the era of pluralism. It is in this account where essencialism and historicism are combined in a way that estimules a (...) heat debate that continues today. In this paper, I give a reconstruction of Danto’s Philosophy of historical language in order to show why this combination is possible and which compromises that should be assumed by an authentic historicism. (shrink)

Napredak umjetničkih praksi i stvaranje nove kategorije umjetničkih artefakata očekivano je doveo i do problema intuitivnog, ali i teorijskog određenja navedenih artefakata i praksi kao umjetničkih. Uvođenje do tada neumjetničkih ili uporabnih predmeta svakodnevnoga svijeta u svijet umjetnosti otvorio je rascjep u određivanju predikata biti umjetničkim djelom. Odgovor i teorijski izazov koji je uslijedio pojavio se u često osporavanoj potrebi pa i samoj mogućnosti da se umjetnost uopće definira. Čini se da, u kontekstu navedenog problema, potreba nije sporna, ali mogućnost (...) definiranja snažno je metodološki određena – željena definicija ne smije se urušiti novim napretkom umjetničkih praksi, posebno s obzirom da se izvodi iz umjetnosti kao dovršenog sustava. Nadalje, ona unatoč svojoj dovršenosti mora moći obuhvatiti nove umjetničke predmete i tako zadržati demokratičnost, inovativnost i imaginaciju kao obilježja koja tradicionalno konstituiraju područje umjetničkoga. Tako zahtjevan zadatak, koji bez dublje teorijske analize djeluje gotovo protuslovno, moguće je izvršiti spojem Dantoovih i Hegelovih teorija. Umjetnost valja pokušati definirati iz nje same, njenog historijskog napretka, a ujedno i opravdano napustiti estetiku kao filozofsku disciplinu koja se pokazuje nedovoljnom u korist samoproblematizacije umjetnosti kao filozofije umjetnosti. Time umjetnost sama sebi postaje objektom ispitivanja i vlastitom filozofijom koja omogućuje traženu dvostrukost u njenom definiranju. (shrink)