后历史艺术的哲学转向——对阿瑟·丹托“艺术终结论”批判的再思考  

The Philosophical Turn of Post Historical Art--Rethinking on Arthur Danto’s Criticism of the End of Art

作　　者：李冉[1] Li Ran(Northeast University,Liaoning,110819)

机构地区：[1]东北大学,沈阳110819

出　　处：《语言与文化研究》2023年第3期180-182,共3页Language and Culture Research

摘　　要：从黑格尔“艺术解体”的宣判理路出发,美国艺术哲学家阿瑟·丹托在1984年重提该命题,即“艺术终结论”,或为艺术史上的“二次终结论”。从二者的阐释范围与本质属性作差异化研究:黑格尔就历史整体立论,而阿瑟·丹托则更倾向于具象艺术反思中所形成的纯粹艺术史叙事,是对黑格尔艺术终结论预言进行的后历史艺术的哲学性重构。在阿瑟·丹托的阐释当中,“艺术终结”实际上是背离了表层语词学的艺术之实体消亡的意指,他意在宣告艺术宏大叙事的终结,沿着汉斯·贝尔廷对艺术史是否终结所作出的探讨路径,提出第三种叙事模式的发展思路,即后历史艺术叙事模式。由此,后现代艺术在此叙事模式下完成后历史艺术的哲学转向,即本体论语境中的二元模型重建。Starting from Hegel’s theory of“the disintegration of art”,the American art philosopher Arthur C·Danto proposed this proposition again in 1984,namely,“the theory of the end of art”,or“the theory of the second end”in the history of art.From the perspective of the interpretation scope and essential attributes of the two,a differentiated study is made.Hegel argues on the whole of history,while Arthur C·Danto prefers the pure artistic history narrative formed in the reflection of concrete art,which is a philosophical reconstruction of post-historical art based on Hegel’s prediction of the end of art.In Arthur Danto’s interpretation,“the end of art”actually deviates from the meaning of the disappearance of the entity of art in surface lexicology.He intends to announce the end of the grand narrative of art.Following Hans Belting’s exploration path on whether the history of art is over,he proposes a third narrative mode of development,namely,the post historical artistic narrative mode.Thus,postmodern art completes the philosophical turn of postmodern art in this narrative mode,namely,the reconstruction of the binary model in the ontological context.

关 键 词：阿瑟·丹托 艺术终结论 美学熵状态 后历史艺术叙事 哲学转向 

分 类 号：G63[文化科学—教育学]