What do you think?
Rate this book
The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art
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 Gilmore 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.
- GenresPhilosophyNonfictionArt
248 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 1986
About the author
Arthur C. Danto
157 books153 followersArthur C. Danto was Johnsonian Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Columbia University and art critic for The Nation. He was the author of numerous books, including Unnatural Wonders: Essays from the Gap Between Art and Life, After the End of Art, and Beyond the Brillo Box: The Visual Arts in Post-Historical Perspective.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
November 8, 2009
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 front than the latter, but to be fair that is because, despite the title, "The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art" is not primarily about philosophy, but, instead--and happily for me--is about art.
As one should probably expect from a collection of essays, the quality and ambition of the pieces vary a bit, but they are almost always at least interesting. "The End of Art" is probably the gem of the collection, as it most explicitly and thoroughly sets out the author's Hegelian philosophy of art and of art history. (Its explicit Hegelianism, with its suggestion of a linear, progressive history of art, and an "end" to that history, made me skeptical, but I actually found the theory pretty plausible--though admittedly I know very little about the subject.) The title essay is also thought-provoking, though I have to say that I found Danto's discussion of Plato's Republic--one of the few subjects in the book that I actually do know a little about--to be rather thin in places.
Danto is a self-consciously stylish author, and occasionally his flair veers into a slightly annoying preciousness, but much less so than I worried might happen. More often the stylistic flourishes are at least amusing or clever, and sometimes they really help to underscore the author's insights.
Perhaps the highest praise I have for Danto's work is that, having returned to more ordinary art history books, I find myself applying some of Danto's categories and insights, and finding them remarkably helpful in understanding at least the progression of modern art, which is his primary subject here. For me, at least, that was really what I most wanted out of the book, and I'm glad it delivered.
As one should probably expect from a collection of essays, the quality and ambition of the pieces vary a bit, but they are almost always at least interesting. "The End of Art" is probably the gem of the collection, as it most explicitly and thoroughly sets out the author's Hegelian philosophy of art and of art history. (Its explicit Hegelianism, with its suggestion of a linear, progressive history of art, and an "end" to that history, made me skeptical, but I actually found the theory pretty plausible--though admittedly I know very little about the subject.) The title essay is also thought-provoking, though I have to say that I found Danto's discussion of Plato's Republic--one of the few subjects in the book that I actually do know a little about--to be rather thin in places.
Danto is a self-consciously stylish author, and occasionally his flair veers into a slightly annoying preciousness, but much less so than I worried might happen. More often the stylistic flourishes are at least amusing or clever, and sometimes they really help to underscore the author's insights.
Perhaps the highest praise I have for Danto's work is that, having returned to more ordinary art history books, I find myself applying some of Danto's categories and insights, and finding them remarkably helpful in understanding at least the progression of modern art, which is his primary subject here. For me, at least, that was really what I most wanted out of the book, and I'm glad it delivered.
July 9, 2014
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 his treatments result in very little, if any, distortion of the original thinker, though one might raise some minor quibbles.
My major beef is that I did not like his style of citations, because I couldn't locate at least one quotation that I wanted to follow up on. I would have preferred him axe the index in favor of footnotes or endnotes.
By far, the best essays for me were "Philosophy as/and/of Literature" and "Philosophizing Literature". But that is probably because I studied and continue to study philosophy while teaching English.
My major beef is that I did not like his style of citations, because I couldn't locate at least one quotation that I wanted to follow up on. I would have preferred him axe the index in favor of footnotes or endnotes.
By far, the best essays for me were "Philosophy as/and/of Literature" and "Philosophizing Literature". But that is probably because I studied and continue to study philosophy while teaching English.
September 30, 2021
Anteriormente havia lido capítulos específicos para a pesquisa utilizando uma edição brasileira da Autêntica e retomei a leitura da peça inteira nesse mês, na edição da Columbia University Press. Percebi uso reduzido de recursos exegéticos e elaborações obscuras nesse livro em específico. Danto realmente tem uma competência retórica e argumentativa impressionante, fora o extenso repertório em Hegel. Bons pontos no geral e destaque nos seguintes ensaios:
II. The Appreciation and Interpretation of Works of Art
IV. Language, Art, Culture, Text
V. The End of Art
II. The Appreciation and Interpretation of Works of Art
IV. Language, Art, Culture, Text
V. The End of Art
December 1, 2018
A must read for anyone intersted in art.
December 28, 2010
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.
Currently reading
December 3, 2010sucked in by the title, so far Danto has kept the promises it made
May 27, 2013
meh. don't quite know how i feel about Danto yet.
July 22, 2014
în hăţişul ghimpos și umed
September 7, 2020
I couldn't finish this. Even as someone who has completed a graduate degree and works in the museum field, the writing was far too dense and utterly inaccessible.
September 8, 2014
Fabuloso! Um clássico para começar a entender a arte contemporânea.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews