Hegel and Danto on the End of Art的论文.docVIP

Hegel and Danto on the End of Art的论文 Hegel and Danto on the End of Art的论文 my interest in hegel’s views on the end of art began in the mid-1970s and resulted in a paper, “a reexamination of the ‘death of art’ interpretation of hegel’s aesthetics,” first presented at a meeting of the hegel society of america and subsequently published in art, and logic in hegel’s philosophy , in 1980.[i] at that time, the “end of art” thesis was more dramatically characterized as “the death of art.” this understanding of hegel was based mainly on a mistranslation of key terms in hegel’s aesthetics in an english translation done in the 1920s by the english scholar osmatson. the english translation by sir t. m. knox, of hegel’s lectures in aesthetics in 1975 served to correct such misleading translations and supports the view that hegel’s did not portend the death of art. based on a careful investigation of hegel’s texts relating to this problem, and an examination of the arguments of scholars (benedetto croce and eric heller) who advanced the death of art thesis, i concluded that, despite complex and sometimes misleading statements, hegel did not intend the end of art in the sense that this idea was popularly understood. by taking certain isolated statements out of context it would be possible to argue that hegel did intend the death of art, for example, when he or his editors cite passages that seem to say that hegel believed that art had come to an end in his time or that its purpose as a means of revealing the truth had been supplanted by religion and philosophy. but, as sir malcom knox pointed out,,hegel also “said that art would continue its task for thousands of years…”[ii] t the time i did not carry on this discussion with direct applications to modern and contemporary art. yet it seemed clear to me that hegel’s analysis opened up the way for future developments pertaining to the debates over the end of art that have subsequently transpired. my interpretation of hegel and the e