丹托的藝術終結論

The Theory of the End of Art by Danto

10.7065/MRPC.201005.0173

梁光耀(Leung Kwong Yiu Buda)

藝術終結 ； 非外顯性質 ； 不可分辨性 ； 藝術定義 ； 現代主義藝術 ； 藝術價值 ； 多元主義 ； The end of art ； Non-Manifest Property ； Indiscernibility ； Definition of Art ； Modernist Art ； Art Value ； Pluralism

哲學與文化

37卷5期（2010 / 05 / 01）

173 - 189

繁體中文

丹托認為藝術史的發展在1964年已經終結，因為出現了沃霍爾的《布瑞洛盒子》。它只是日常事物，我們根本不能分辨這件作品和真正的布瑞洛盒子。但藝術終結並不表示不能再有藝術創作，也不表示藝術不再有價值。它只是意味藝術概念的可能性已經窮盡了，藝術在風格方面不能再有突破，藝術史也不可能再有發展方向。丹托認為藝術終結後有兩個後果。一個是在藝術終結後可以從非外顯性質給藝術下本質定義，另一個是多元主義。 丹托受黑格爾的歷史觀所影響，用「藝術自我認識」來解釋藝術的發展，而現代主義藝術的發展就在於不斷尋找藝術的本質，藝術終結即表示藝術不能進一步認識自身，必須將這個任務交給哲學來完成。雖然我大致同意丹托對藝術史的解釋，但我認為現代主義藝術的終結並不表示藝術的終結。

Danto thinks that the development of art history was over in 1964, because Andy Warhol's ”Brillo Box” appeared. We can no longer make a distinction between this work of art and the real Brillo Box, which is just a commonplace object. However, the end of art does not mean we cannot make art anymore, nor does it mean that art has lost its value. It just means the concept of art is exhausted. No new style of art can emerge. There is no direction for art history to go on. Danto told us that there are two consequences of the end of art. One is we can find the essence of art and define art in terms of non-manifest properties. The other is pluralism. Danto was influenced by Hegel's view of art history, he used ”self understanding of art” to interpret the development of art, and he thought that the development of modernist art is to find out the essence of art. The end of art means that art can no longer understands itself, it should pass this mission to philosophy. In general, I agree with that the interpretation of art history given by Danto, but I think the end of modernism does not necessarily mean the end of art.

1. 黑格爾：《歷史哲學》，王造時與謝詔徵譯，上海：商務印書館，1946。
2. Arto, Haapala(ed.),Jerrold, Levinson(ed.),Veikko, Rantala(ed.)(1997).The End of Art and Beyond: Essays after Danto.New Jersey:Humanities Press.
3. Blocker, H. Gene(ed.),Jeffers, Jennifer M.(ed.)(1995).Contextualizing Aesthetics: From Plato to Lyotard.New York:Wadsworth Publishing Company.
4. Brian, O''Conner(ed.)(2000).The Adorno Reader.Oxford:Blackwell.
5. Burger, Peter,Shaw, Michael(tr.)(1984).Theory of the Avant-Garde.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
6. Carroll, Noel(1998).The End of Art?.History and Theory,37(4)
7. Chipp, Herschel B.(1968).Theories of Modern Art.Los Angeles:University of California Press.
8. Danto, A. C.(1987).The State of The Art.New York:Prentice Hall.
9. Danto, A. C.(1992).Beyond the Brillo Box: The Visual Arts in Post-Historical Perspective.New York:Harper Collins.
10. Danto, A. C.(1998).The End of Art: A Philosophical Defense.History and Theory,37(4)
11. Danto, A. C.(1998).The Wake of Art.Amsterdam:G+B ARTS International.
12. Danto, A. C.(1997).After the End of Art.Princeton:Princeton University Press.
13. Danto, A. C.(1986).The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art.New York:Columbia University Press.
14. Foster, Hal(ed.)(1983).Anti-Aesthetics: Essays on Postmodern Culture.New Jersey:Bay Press.
15. Gablik, Suzi(1984).Has Modernism Failed?.London:Thames and Hudson.
16. Hegel, Georg Wilhelm F.,Knox, T. M. (tr.)(1975).Hegel's Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
17. Herwitz, Daniel(1993).Making Theory/Constructing Art.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
18. Kosuth, Joseph(1969).Art After Philosophy and After: Collected Writings.MIT Press.
19. Kuspit, Donald(2004).The End of Art.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
20. Rollins, Mark (ed.)(1993).Danto and His Critics.Cambridge:Blackwell.
21. Ross, Stephen David(ed.)(1994).Art and Its Significance.New York:State University of New York Press.
22. Smith, Paul(ed.),Wilde, Carolyn(ed.)(2002).A Companion to Art Theory.Malden, MA:Blackwell.
23. 台北市立美術館(1987)。西洋現代藝術。台北:台北市立美術館。
24. 黑格爾、朱光潛譯(1979)。美學。北京:商務印書館。
25. 漢斯·貝爾廷、常寧生編譯(1999)。藝術史終結了嗎？。湖南美術出版社。
26. 劉昌元(1991)。盧卡奇及其文哲思想。台北:聯經。
27. 劉昌元(2002)。文學中的哲學思想。