Research On The Aesthetics Of "The End Of Art"

Regarding "the End of Art",there have been no shortage of investigations among academics both at home and abroad.This thesis tackles this issue from the perspective of aesthetics and,to be more specific,from the perspective of the history of aesthetics.The End of Art,first and foremost,relates to how art comes into being.The institution of modern art system straightforwardly gives rise to the idea of autonomous art,which in turn becomes an object of aesthetics.A safe conclusion to be drawn here is that the autonomy of aesthetics is made possible only after the institution of modern art system.From the 18th century to the 20th century,the concept of aesthetic autonomy,as initiated by Immanuel Kant in close contact with contemporary thoughts,has undergone full development in almost all aspects encompassing the subjective attitudes(i.e.the aesthetics of Lord Shaftesbury)and the objective forms(i.e.the formalist aesthetics).And especially in the 20th century,the concept has become a de facto collective subconsciousness for literary and artistic practioners and critics alike.However,along with the rise of consumerism during the second half of the 20th century,the borderline between literature and art and other human activities has gradually blurred,resulting in an ever-expanding realm of literature and art research.In an "Age of Mechanical Reproduction",artistic works have been "disenchanted",with mass culture growing ever more prevalent while elite culture fading into the background.Instead of contemplation or aesthetic judgment,sensory stimulation has become a hot pursuit.Aesthetics has been ceding its autonomy and gradually become generalized.All these collude to bring the finality of autonomous aesthetics.As back as in 1817,Hegel made a contentious assertion that art would be in time replaced by philosophy,thus initiating the debate concerning "the End of Art".He further claimed that aesthetics was a philosophy studying art rather than a science exploring perceptual knowledge.Therefore,the End of Art might be literally interpreted as the End of Aesthetics.Would aesthetics,with its intrinsic value and highly acclaimed autonomy as defined by Kant,cease to exist after Hegel?To put it into perspective,Hegel's "prophecy" was only half-right.And the other half was to be found in the works of the American art philosopher Arthur C.Danto who,in 1984,resurrected the idea of "the End of Art".Notwithstanding the fact that Hegel and Danto approached this issue from different angles,together they drew an aesthetic pedigree of "the End of Art".Interestingly,Danto's conclusion is that the End of Art does not necessarily mean the end of aesthetics,albeit the end of autonomous aesthetics with art at its epicenter.The redemption of aesthetics lies in its redeeming the dying art,i.e.redeeming art from the latter's dire circumstances,founding new basis for the latter's sustained being,and meanwhile construing a reasonable elucidation for and a practical escape from its own crisis.The redemption of aesthetics also lies in its return to and its pursuit of the aesthetic tastes as an antidote to the aestheticization of everyday life.The argument here is to return to aesthetics per se and to the REAL beauty and art.In the final section,the question of "what is aesthetics for" will be meticulously attended to.The realm of aesthetics,especially since "the End of Art" was first uttered,has largely expanded to cover such arenas as Environmental Aesthetics and Aesthetics of Everyday Life.In conclusion,"the End of Art" in no sense symbolizes the end of aesthetics.Instead,aesthetics,by transcending art,will grow and prosper in a brand-new direction.