The aim of this paper is to challenge Fred Beiser’s
interpretation of Hegel’s meta-aesthetical position on the
future of art. According to Beiser, Hegel’s comments about
the ‘‘pastness’’ of art commit Hegel to viewing postromantic
art as merely a form of individual self-expression.
I both defend and extend to another territory, Robert
Pippin’s interpretation of Hegel as a proto-modernist,
where such modernism involves (1) his rejection of both
classicism and Kantian aesthetics and (2) his espousal
of what one may call reflective aesthetics. By ‘‘reflective
aesthetics,’’ I mean an aesthetic framework which sees art
as a form of enquiry, one whose aim is to not merely excite
the imagination but to principally focus attention on social
and cultural norms. The meta-aesthetical consequences of
reflective aesthetics and their Hegelian heritage have both
an interpretive and philosophic value: according to me,
Beiser’s reading of Hegel is challenged, and my interpretation
of how Hegel envisaged the future of art offers a
new and engaging way of understanding one of the most
notorious claims in the philosophy of art, namely that art
has ended
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)