“Of course, since the understanding of art has always been determined by the theoretical perspective, it was not until art became autonomous from theory, truely external to it, that the grounds for its original suppression could emerge. Throughout its history philosophy attempted to tame art, to suppress its tendential protest to the reign of theory. But while philosophy had no difficulty consigning art to the realm of sensory experience, to the world of opinion (doxa) and appearance (the very ‘world’ of political life), almost to non-being, nonetheless the beauty of works shone, and their shining, their claiming spectators through their sensory characteristics, tendentially gave pause to the relegation of art to non-being and non-truth.”

“As the dominance of theory grew, art’s tendential difference from it grew as well; the discordance between art and truth began to rage. Slowly, then, artistic knowing, what came to be called aesthetic reflection by Kant, took on the visage of an after image of practical knowing, of phronesis; and slowly artistic practice, creative genius, emerged as an after image of political praxis.”

The Fate of Art: Aesthetic Alienation from Kant to Derrida to Adorno, pp. 12-13.