Is art possible without aesthetics: an approach to the issue of aesthetics in Arthur Danto's What is art?

This reflection paper attempts to analyze the notion of aesthetics in art, presented by Danto in his text "What is art?" Its reading hypothesis is that art is possible without aesthetics, if the latter is to be understood as the exhibition of what is beautiful, and gives visual pleasure. Nevertheless, if aesthetics is to be understood as the way the parts of an artistic work are displayed, as well as the justification to exhibit them in a particular given way or another, art cannot be separated from asthetics. My conclusion is that, the key to solve the referred problem of whether art is possible without aesthetics or not, lies in the philosophical precision, consistency and sense of plurality given by Danto to the notion of meaning embedded in contrast; but not in incompatibility with aesthetics as an exhibition of what is beautiful and gives visual pleasure. Aesthetics is inextricable from art, if and only if what is beautiful is not the main axis of this relation, but something that is part of artistic expression. Aesthetics is not a synonym of beauty; that is, beauty can be eluded by art. Nevertheless, beauty cannot be severed from human life, since it remains valuable to men as positive encounter between them.