I do not think this is already the right moment for it to happen, that we as humanity are ready for it, but that we are close to it.
Nor do I claim that we should break with the past and traditional aesthetic thought, although it might seem that I do. Not entirely, because without this past and its contribution it is not possible at all to understand such a perspective, in which art becomes something universal and, in every particular instance, conscious, let alone for this very situation to arise, this awareness of art’s existence and role understood in such a way — that is, for this text to come into being. One may suppose that human beings possess the ability to create precisely in order to be able to go beyond what they have created, and the ability to go beyond what they have created in order to justify the emergence of this ability of theirs, acquired through evolution, to justify it through further evolution. 
If one were to follow the concept according to which “Beauty” itself cannot be grasped in terms of concepts, since its essence is living through it, experiencing it, which as such does not stop within any concepts, one can easily arrive at the conclusion that the entire conversation about art rests on something artificial and unreal, on a kind of agreement, and is simply a “marketplace”, no different from the one against which mystics “rebelled” when they encountered it in sacred places. It is indeed a very sad thing that it is still thought possible to possess art, to “trade” in it — not only literally but also figuratively, that is, to speculate, to discuss it at all, exchanging views about it like some commodity — a sad thing because the essence of art, and of Beauty in general, invariably seems to remain the thought derived by Plato: that there is some hidden, higher Truth which, through Beauty as its expression within the limits of our perception, we can experience in the form of “glimpses”. 
Taking this thought further (now following Kant and considering it in the light of hermeneutics), we can experience this hidden entity fully only in the most personal and subjective relationship of ourselves, through the work, with Truth, which, being the One and the “Totality of All Things”, cannot be possessed by what is contained within it, including concepts about it. Of course, the problem of the dialectical progression of judgements arises here. I believe this is of course very important and indeed demolishes the entire construction I have presented here, essentially discarding this whole text altogether, throwing it into the bin, but only as long as we move in the categories of precisely the “marketplace of concepts”: the diversity of theories that are not useful to us because they result from our differing in the degree of our knowledge of ourselves, knowledge supplied to us precisely by art as our personal prayer and ritual, earlier than all concepts, which, while possessing a powerful ability to reveal phenomena, simultaneously conceal them by shortening our experience of them. I hasten to explain that I am not thereby claiming that this dialectical progress is unnecessary, since without it my conclusion would not be possible at all, but that this very progress, the phenomenon of criticism and views about art throughout history, has led to its own degradation. It is a creation serving precisely to let us go beyond it, to rise to a higher level of awareness and thereby of using this “something” we call Art. 
Thus, in my view, the whole discussion about art now serves only to “acquire” the appearance of understanding its essence, which ultimately does not enrich us inwardly more than simply opening ourselves to the work (in Gadamer’s sense) and the work’s influence on our inner transformation, while at the same time serving to destroy the very concept of art. And that is precisely why I claim that perhaps the entire theory of art, all the disciplines studying art, were introduced into the world by Humanity in order ultimately to break with them through the evolution of that humanity’s collective consciousness; that perhaps art is a stage for us. This is why the present text is not iconoclastic and is not directed against art criticism (it is, after all, part of that criticism), or against art, but through it towards further progress, the liberation of human creation from the prison of concepts which, having become blurred, have simply created an empty space that creation now seeks to fill, of which this argument is a sign. The disciplines of art and all the concepts concerning it have taught humanity about the importance of the power of creation to such a degree that we may soon begin to use this power consciously without them; today they demolish themselves, constituting something artificially created by human beings apparently (though it is impossible to specify or prove this) for evolution; they are a kind of Great Concept, a Metaconcept through which our awareness of reality moves to a “higher level”. Perhaps this is not merely the evolution of the human species but of reality itself. In this sense Gadamer’s words that the game plays us remain relevant, while Boudrilard’s concept of the “simulacrum” and “simulation” acquires a positive meaning.
Archived comments
Readers’ comments and the author’s replies, with their original names and dates.
Anonymous ·
Comment translation
I think the course of history cannot be stopped. That the world’s diversity will tend to deepen. Today people tend to speak of visual culture rather than art, and this concept is more appropriate for contemporary visual processes. What you’re talking about might instead lead to art dissolving into life, so that we stop noticing it. The duality of our world, governed by difference, suggests that this will have both positive and negative consequences...
Original comment
Mylśle, że biegu historii nie da sie zatrzyamac. Że rożnorodnośc świata bedzie sie raczej pogłebiac. Dzis mowi sie raczej o kulturze wizualnej, niż o sztuce i to pojecie jest bardziej własciwe dla wspolczesnych wizualnych procesow. To o czym mowisz może spowodowac raczej rozpuszczenie sie sztuki w życiu, przez co przestaniemy ją dostrzegac. Dualnośc naszego świata, ktorym żądzi rożnica, każe myślec, iż bedzie to miało swoje, zarowno pozytywne jak i negatywne konsekwencje...