Arthur Danto's claim that the "end of art" has arrived was really an attempt to explain how art history came to an end. While reading Danto's essay, my initial response I perceived was that Danto was claiming art is over. So I thought, why are there still so many art makers or art majors here at Marywood if art were truly over? After further examining the essay and from class lectures, it was more apparent what Danto was claiming. That is, people are still making art but the history of art is over. I agree with Danto's claim and will explain in this essay why the history of art is truly over.
             Danto does not claim no one is making art anymore or that no good quality art can be created. Rather, that the history of art is finished or over. In other words, art had its story in history and history is therefore no longer being made in art. Today, art makers are simply mirroring the past. Works of art that were produced up until the 1950's and early sixties were all part of the history of art that is now over. Since then, art makers continued to produce works of art but no one is able to say whether it is art or not. Hence, anything could be a work of art today.
             The evolution of art ended decades ago. For example, one may consider music and fashion and how both, have advanced over the past forty years. Since the introduction of rock and roll music in the 1950's and early sixties, has any new music really advanced or continued to shock anyone? With the exception of "Rap music" introduced in the seventies, one may agree that no new music has really shocked an audience the way rock & roll did. From Elvis to the Rolling Stones, rock & roll music was shocking for society. In 1971 Don McLean wrote a song called "American Pie" to describe how the 50's music was now over and finished. In the following lyric "Oh, and as I watched him on the stage-My hands were clenched in fists of rage-no angel born in hell-Could break tha...