The End of Art Essay Example for Free

The End of Art Essay The end of art is not the death of art, but the wholesale elimination of what used to be considered art and its replacement by a new concept: pluralism. When art has exhausted itself and this concept has been brought into the forefront of the consciousness, this awareness signals the end of art. Art is no longer art in the traditional sense (having a manifesto-aesthetically pleasing, etc. ) because the accessibility to art and to create art has allowed the masses to be exposed to it and to manipulate it. As Danto says any â€Å"art† made after Andy Warhol in the 1960s is not attached to any manifesto, and the art that is produced after the end of art is consider pluralism and cultural artifacts. A shift from the artwork itself evoking an emotional response is no longer relevant. The criterion for which art must stand up to be is gone. Simply, essentially philosophy becomes more important than the art itself. As shown by Hegel, â€Å"We have gone beyond just the emotional response to art, our ideas about the art, our judgments about the art is not for creating art again, but understanding the philosophy behind it. As with Modernism which pushed art to its limit, â€Å"The age of Manifestos is what it took to be philosophy into the heart of artistic production†¦discovery of that philosophical truth† (Danto, 30). An example of common manifesto of the college dorm room: The lava lamp, the Salvador Dali poster, the futon, the psychedelic trinkets overall the place individually, but now it has combined separate manifestos into one manifesto together. What the artist has created become less about the physicality of it and about the philosophy and the idea behind it. He takes the idea that there are no more criterion to what makes â€Å"art† art, that anything can be art, and thus the term â€Å"art† becomes meaningless and needs a new term: pluralism. The freedom that anyone can create something and it may possibly be considered pluralism or a cultural artifact has democratized the whole process and eliminated the critics, the middlemen, in the process. The consumer and the creator are brought together, and the critic is left looking for work. What is considered art is determined by a group of individuals who are involved in the arts either academically, critically, an artist, buyers, sellers, etc. Danto believes that art critics decide what is considered art and then art is assigned a worth. I disagree with Danto. The art critic is obsolete because if anything can be â€Å"art† then there is no real authority on what is art (pluralism) in the post historical phase? What self-respecting art critic would stake his or her reputation on say, beanie babies? But people pay thousands of dollars for something that in an earlier age could only be described as art. It is not that people will not make art, but that â€Å"pluralism† cannot be held up against the traditional criteria of the past historical art, as shown, â€Å"Not that art died or that painters stopped painting, but that the history of art, structured narratively, had come to an end† (Danto, 125). The modernism movement in which art shifted from being about making interpretations of the world to a search for internal meaning. â€Å"Artists were no longer concerned to imitate reality, but to give objective expression to the feelings reality elicited in them† (Danto, 65). Hegel’s idea that art had ended was not accepted widely during his time because much more artwork and the furthering of art would continue for some time. The imitation of reality through painting was mastered when we shifted from the mimesis paradigm in which painting reality as accurately as possible was the goal. The camera was the nail in the coffin. (Danto, 25) Realism was out a job. So what do you do when you don’t have a job? Become a philosopher! Modernism reflects the only thing that taking a brush loaded with paint to a canvas had left to do: make a closing statement. Danto’s claim is fitting because there has not been anything new presented in the ‘artworld’, since Warhol’s paintings, but what about technology. Graphic design was innovative, but is it pluralism or technology? Does technology further pluralism or destroy it? What does Danto mean by the master narrative of history, and how does this explain the end of art? The end of a certain narrative of art and of history as discussed by Danto from the 1400s up until the 1960s had â€Å"progressing innovative development, in which it is only possible when art is preserved, to which the artists can compare their own representations and transform his or her on work beyond the art of their predecessors† (Danto, 66). The imitation of life and reality, in painting, was essential to the furthering of the discipline. The categorical story of painting’s progression, and therefore art’s progression, from classical to medieval to romanticism to renaissance to impressionism, and so on exposed in each period (which is only possible because of history) a new innovation, a new way of representing reality and non-realities. With paintings on the caves to the two dimensional arts to the advent of the camera/photograph which culminated the west’s goal to attain perfection or at least represent reality as closely to the actual object of which it was representing. The master narrative which can only be recognized and understood after enough time has passed is Danto’s idea (Hegel) that the story of Western art and the characteristics of that story include aesthetics, beauty, skill and a certain meaning or statement (manifesto) behind it are rendered meaningless. As Danto describes, â€Å"the master narrative of the history of artin the West but by the end not in the West aloneis that there is an era of imitation, followed by an era of ideology, followed by our post-historical era in which, with qualification, anything goes. . . In our narrative, at first only mimesis was art, then several things were art but each tried to extinguish its competitors, and then, finally, it became apparent that there were no stylistic or philosophical constraints. There is no special way works of art have to be. And that is the present and, I should say, the final moment in the master narrative. It is the end of the story(Danto, 47). This story that Danto says has come to an conclusion. The narrative that art should be beautiful or have a struggle or have a certain technique to it no longer applies. Modern art has culminated in its conclusion. This challenged our ideas of painting, instead of painting objects or the external world to painting a surface or idea, â€Å"They were thinking of Robert Ryman’s more or less all-white paintings, or perhaps the aggressive monotonous stripe paintings of the French artist Daniel Buren (Danto, 4). This shows that art (painting) had become completely exhausted externally and all that was left to discover was the internal. The shift in the master narrative for art from realism to abstract (ideas) was essentially depicting the external world to the internal world of the self (or artist). It became about how the artist’s ideas, about emotions and other realities. The master narrative of art has lost its capacity to continue to further art’s progression, it is like the scriptures of the bible, where it is detached and ironic from current times and the individual. What once existed only for the select few is now an egalitarian experiment, thus so no one save the authoritarian longing for the days when he could tyrannically rule over the masses should mourn the end of art. The view that only the select few, the artists, the critics, the buyers, the sellers have reign over the realm of the culturally significant and beautiful ended. 3. How does the development of pop art and music reflect the answers given in previous questions? According to Danto, Pop-art brought about the end of art. Essentially by taking a common object (artifact) or sound or concept that is familiar or well known to people and putting it in a different circumstance thus making it foreign or unfamiliar. Art (pluralism) is stuck in the cyclical loop that just keeps manipulating the familiar making it unfamiliar thus making familiar again. Danto believes that all that is left are the philosophical ideas. This goes back to the idea. The idea is what motivates the art. As with Josef Albers picture, â€Å"Study in Green†, was a new idea at the time, however anybody can do that now. Once something new has been created then it is done and if another creates a similar piece it will not be original art and it will be considered ‘esque’ of the original artist. With the advent of pop art which turns ordinary objects into art, than all things become art rendering the term â€Å"art† meaningless as a term for defining. Warhol said everything can be art; therefore there is beauty in everything. â€Å"The great traditional paradigm of the visual arts had been, in fact, that of mimesis, which served the theoretical purposes of art admirably for several centuries†¦to extirpate competing paradigms (Danto, 29). It was believed that modernism would continue to carry art further. This was not the case. Roy Lichtenstein’s famous comic-book style paintings were not just brute copies, but much detail and intention went into his paintings, however this is the end. One cannot tell the difference between the actual object and the art that it is representing, in which reality and art imploded in on each other. Once Pop-art hit into mainstream through consumerism and once again the idea of taking a popular object and making it unfamiliar. Andy Warhol broke down elitism of high art/low art dichotomy and made it accessible to all. This allowed for more creativity with applying ideas to different mediums. Danto’s idea that we are currently in a state of a cyclical familiarity-unfamiliarity can be shown often times in individual musicians/artists progression, such as Bjork. The progression of Bjork’s pop music in early recordings to currently, with combinations of genres and possibly unclassified types of composition, in which she fuses two or more mechanical instruments together with technology like micro-controllers and turns it into music. However this does not mean that it is unintentional or lacking complex structure. As shown with early electronic music, such as, Xenakis’s â€Å"Chrome† in which he recorded the crackling of a fire in a fireplace, and he was the first to do it. He took something that is common and made it uncommon. Also, it was considered new music because there is no reference point. Unlike music of today where almost everything is piggy-backed on something else it can leave a feeling that music is homogenous. With the term of â€Å"selling-out† it does not just relate to selling to advertisers, or changing the essence of the music, but even getting popular is considered a form of selling out, for one to be artistic one must stay in obscurity. I believe there still is underground music because as long as there is radio and the big wigs determine who is important/big, there will be big acts and small acts. However, it does not seem likely this will last regardless of how many downloaders are sued. We are currently in a story-less moment in history. There are no definitive criteria, no manifesto, and no parameters. We are in an exciting time where anything can be art (pluralism) and anyone can be an artist. We make look back at this time and it will be labeled post-historical, but for now we are in a time of great change in art and thus so in society.