For Marxism, art supersedes philosophy as thought becomes concrete in social life.

Evidence

It is interesting to note in this respect that for both Hegel and Marx alike, and in spite of that reverence for Greek art which they shared, the perfect work of art, that is to say, one in which form is wholly adequate to content, cannot theoretically yet have come into being. But in Hegel’s scheme of things this is so because art ultimately tends to transcend itself by becoming theology and philosophy, and abolishes itself as sensuous play as it grows increasingly nearer to that full self-consciousness which is Absolute Spirit. For Marxism, on the contrary, it is rather philosophy that abolishes itself as thought grows increasingly concrete, and the example of Lukács has shown us the degree to which art as such presents solid credentials for replacing the former discipline. But for Marxism the adequation of object to subject or of form to content can exist as an imaginative possibility only where in some way or another it has been concretely realized in social life itself, so that formal realizations, as well as formal defects, are taken as the signs of some deeper corresponding social and historical configuration which it is the task of criticism to explore. — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 674

Categorization

• XREF: Directly names Lukács and the transcendence-of-philosophy debate — the exact Frankfurt-School lineage thread the reader is tracing.
• DEFINE: Sharply distinguishes Hegel’s and Marx’s accounts of the art/philosophy hierarchy, giving the reader a clean dialectical schema.