Danto’s account of artistic freedom is really Fichtean self-positing, not Hegelian

Evidence

The equation of pre-modern icons with postmodern simulacra, as art before and after art, involves an obvious paralogism — since in the first case objects are endowed retrospectively with aesthetic status, while in the second they are expressly denied it. What qualifies, then, the latter as art at all? For Danto, the answer is essentially the fiat of the artist. The difference between the commodity in the supermarket and its reproduction in the museum lies in Warhol’s debonair gesture itself. It would be difficult to imagine a philosophy of art that was, in substance, less Hegelian. The real inspiration here is closer to Fichte: the ego positing whatever world it wills. — Perry Anderson, The Origins of Postmodernity, 252

Categorization

• XREF: A contrarian reading of Danto that distinguishes his ‘end of art’ from the Hegelian route — useful for the reader navigating rival periodization claims.