丹托藝術進步歷史的終結理由之研究

A Study on Danto’s the End of Developmental Progressive History of Art

本文以《藝術終結之後》為核心，透過「細讀法」探討亞瑟．丹托（Arthur Danto, 1924-2013）藝術進步歷史終結之理由的書寫模態及原因。本文從兩部分來論述：（1）論證進步史觀的問題，以及（2）藉由前人的兩種對進步史觀終結的範式與成果，提出當進步史觀遇上當代藝術的問題時的解決之道，並正反面交織討論。在第一脈絡下，由里格爾（Alois Riegl, 1858-1905）及黑格爾（Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, 1770-1831）的藝術史觀揭露藝術進步史觀的問題；第二脈絡下，由評論者葛林伯格（Clement Greenberg, 1909-1994）以及佛萊（Roger Fry, 1866-1934）對前衛藝術的研究成果，提出解決之道與看法，成為奠基丹托終結論的重要影響與功能。丹托美學以分析哲學的方法論介入對知識的生產，提供解決方式，使終結論得到另一種轉換的出口。

The thesis approaches Arthur C. Danto’s After the End of Art with a close reading and explores Danto’s writing methods and reasoning behind his idea of the progressive history of art. The research includes two perspectives. First, it disputes the questions regarding the idea of progressive history. Second, it proposes means of solving problems with recourse to two types of former critical norms and discussions on the end of the idea of progressive history upon confronting contemporary art, incorporating both positive and negative evaluations. Concerning the first perspective, the Hegelian idea of art history illustrates the problems with the idea of progressive art history. With regard to the second aspect, in light of Greenberg’s and Fry’s research on avant-garde art, the thesis proposes solutions to the current problems and asserts substantial suggestions to support Danto’s concept of the end of art. Danto’s aesthetics advocate the methodology of analytical philosophy to address the production of knowledge and provide solutions that determine a possible transition for the end of art.