Year 2017, Volume 1, Issue 3, Pages 156 - 163 2017-09-30

This paper is a critique of the conception of art which is mainly based on Arthur Danto’s definition of art via Hegelian aesthetics. In 1964, when Danto encountered with Andy Warhol’s Brillo Box a renewed era for the definition of art has come. For Hegel one of the most crucial criteria for art-work is its indispensible adequacy between content and presentation. Although Danto as a philosopher is so much Hegelian by the time of modern art there emerges a historical shift within art and this article tries to reveal how Danto departs from Hegel through the philosophical question of what makes any work an art-work. When there renders no ‘bodily’ distinction between content and presentation, there emerges an essential question: According to what one of the Brillo boxes inside a grocery store is just an ordinary box while the other one is such a precious artwork in Soho Gallery.

Danto, Hegel, Pop Art, Warhol
  • 1. Arthur C. Danto, After the End of Art: Contemporary Art and the Pale of History, Princeton University Press, 1997.
  • 2. Arthur C. Danto, The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art, New York, Columbia University Press, 1986.
  • 3. Clement Greenberg, “Counter-Avant Garde” Art International 15 (May 1971).
  • 4. Clement Greenberg, “The Case for Abstract Art”, in Collected Essays and Criticism, Volume IV, The University of Chicago Press, 1959.
  • 5. Mark Rollins (ed.), Danto and His Critics, Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.
  • 6. Noel Carroll, “Danto’s New Definition of Art and the Problem of Art Theories” in British Journal of Aesthetics, Vol. 37, No. 4, 1997.
  • 7. G. W. F. Hegel, Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, transl. T. M. Knox, Oxford, 1975.
  • 8. Peter Lamarque and Stein Haugom Olsen, (eds.), Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publication, 2004.
Subjects Management
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Author: Burçak İSMET ÖZSOY
Country: Turkey


Bibtex @research article { fsecon334861, journal = {Fiscaoeconomia}, issn = {}, eissn = {2564-7504}, address = {Ahmet Arif EREN}, year = {2017}, volume = {1}, pages = {156 - 163}, doi = {10.25295/fsecon.334861}, title = {Art! In What Sense?}, key = {cite}, author = {İSMET ÖZSOY, Burçak} }
APA İSMET ÖZSOY, B . (2017). Art! In What Sense?. Fiscaoeconomia, 1 (3), 156-163. DOI: 10.25295/fsecon.334861
MLA İSMET ÖZSOY, B . "Art! In What Sense?". Fiscaoeconomia 1 (2017): 156-163 <http://dergipark.org.tr/fsecon/issue/31372/334861>
Chicago İSMET ÖZSOY, B . "Art! In What Sense?". Fiscaoeconomia 1 (2017): 156-163
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Art! In What Sense? AU - Burçak İSMET ÖZSOY Y1 - 2017 PY - 2017 N1 - doi: 10.25295/fsecon.334861 DO - 10.25295/fsecon.334861 T2 - Fiscaoeconomia JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 156 EP - 163 VL - 1 IS - 3 SN - -2564-7504 M3 - doi: 10.25295/fsecon.334861 UR - https://doi.org/10.25295/fsecon.334861 Y2 - 2017 ER -
EndNote %0 Fiscaoeconomia Art! In What Sense? %A Burçak İSMET ÖZSOY %T Art! In What Sense? %D 2017 %J Fiscaoeconomia %P -2564-7504 %V 1 %N 3 %R doi: 10.25295/fsecon.334861 %U 10.25295/fsecon.334861
ISNAD İSMET ÖZSOY, Burçak . "Art! In What Sense?". Fiscaoeconomia 1 / 3 (September 2017): 156-163. https://doi.org/10.25295/fsecon.334861