The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art

The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art In this acclaimed work first published in world renowned scholar Arthur C Danto explored the inextricably linked but often misunderstood relationship between art and philosophy In light of the

  • Title: The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art
  • Author: Arthur C. Danto Jonathan Gilmore
  • ISBN: 9780231132275
  • Page: 429
  • Format: Paperback
  • In this acclaimed work, first published in 1986, world renowned scholar Arthur C Danto explored the inextricably linked but often misunderstood relationship between art and philosophy In light of the book s impact especially the essay The End of Art, which dramatically announced that art ended in the 1960s this enhanced edition includes a foreword by Jonathan GilIn this acclaimed work, first published in 1986, world renowned scholar Arthur C Danto explored the inextricably linked but often misunderstood relationship between art and philosophy In light of the book s impact especially the essay The End of Art, which dramatically announced that art ended in the 1960s this enhanced edition includes a foreword by Jonathan Gil that discusses how scholarship has changed in response to it Complete with a new bibliography of work on and influenced by Danto s ideas, The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art continues to be of interest to anyone who thinks seriously about art, as well as to philosophers, aestheticians, and art historians.

    One thought on “The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art”

    1. I picked this book up both because I thought that as a relative newcomer to art appreciation, it would be helpful to have a thoughtful theoretical account of art, its aims, the aesthetic standards we do or should bring to bear on it, and so on; and because the book's title suggested that all of this might have something to do with philosophy generally (as opposed to the philosophy of art in particular), which is certainly an interest of mine. I think the book succeeds much better on the former f [...]

    2. While I'm not sure that I agree with all of Danto's arguments, I do appreciate his rigor and style. He writes for both philosophers (read: some academic language and syntax) and the common reader. I am aware that I'm inviting an obvious objection, so I'll pre-empt it: yes, you would get more out of the text if you studied philosophy somewhat discursively. However, I wouldn't just call what he does simply name dropping. He makes his points while crediting the thinker. And the best part is that hi [...]

    3. This collection of essays is not as great as The Transfiguration of the Commonplace. It is an excellent work, don't get me wrong. However, I just don't agree with many of the essays that reject hermeneutics and other interpretations in favor of author's intent.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *