A Study Of Hans Belting’s Theory Of The End Of Art History

Hans Belting’s theory of the end of art history has been inspired and influenced by the context of “post-historicism”,the end of art and the art history rethinking.With the impact on art history by post-modernist culture of the post-industrial era,“post-historical” context is undoubtedly the primary context when Belting thinks about the status quo and future of art history.In time background of the end of art context,the discourse of the end of art is constantly inspired by the intensive and lively discussions about the definition of art,and then provides a hotbed of the “time atmosphere” for the advent of Belting’s Theory of the End of Art History.The rethinking of art history is the trigger.Belting brewes that theory on the basis of research and reflection on the historical viewpoints of art historians such as Vasari,Winckelmann,and Sedlmayr.The theory is in fact with double dimensions: on one hand,it declares the end of the art history discipline and the writing of art history,and on the other hand,it reveals that art history will nurture new developments and hopes.Specifically,Belting mainly constructs the main connotation of the theory from five core dimensions: the Otherness deconstructs the autonomy of art history;the broken frame demolishes the fixed frame of art history;the nonlinear ends the linear narrative of the history of art;the anti-system criticizes the original system of art history;the fictionality breaks the documentary writing of art history.Belting emphasizes that theory of the end of art history is not a system,but a declaration of the end to the art history with the traditional art history in the way of speech,fixed frame,narrative mode and writing system coming to an end.In terms of the theory itself,Belting’s theory of the end of art history,with strong rationality and validity,helps people understand,explain and rethink the art history.However,there are still some problems and shortcomings in the theory,so it is still necessary to reflect on it and space.Specifically,there are three main aspects of the question of the theory: firstly,whether the involvement of “the other” and “fiction” in the writing or narrative of art history is limited or not,what the consequences of their excessive involvement in art history are and how to overcome the limitation caused by “the other” and “fiction”;secondly,what the framework issues involved in the “broken frame” speech of Belting are and how to find a way out;thirdly,in the non-linear and anti-institutional discourse of Belting,whether the authority of traditional art history narration can be maintained,and how to reshape the authoritative writing if that authority is deconstructed.Objectively,we will be better able to perfect Hans Belting’s Theory of the End of Art History through the rethinking of the “limitation problem”,“framework problem” and “authority question” in the end of artistic history as well as the exploration of an effective way to solve problems.