Difficulties of Difference

Abstract

This article examines the persistent conceptual and structural obstacles that pluralism faces within the Euro-United-Statesian art system, particularly in the fields of criticism, art history, and aesthetics. The study situates its inquiry within broader debates around the politics of difference and the decolonization of knowledge, aiming to understand how theoretical frameworks historically incorporated plurality in ways that ultimately neutralize its disruptive potential. Methodologically, the article combines philosophical analysis with a critical rereading of canonical texts by figures such as Clement Greenberg and Arthur Danto, juxtaposed with insights from Indigenous, Black, and decolonial thinkers. The findings suggest that pluralism, while rhetorically embraced, is frequently rendered compatible with a teleological and universalizing narrative that privileges Western aesthetic trajectories. As a result, forms of difference are tolerated only insofar as they can be translated into hegemonic terms. The article concludes by advocating for critical practices that sustain rather than resolve difference, calling for frameworks capable of embracing dissonance, incommensurability, and multiple ontologies without collapsing them into sameness. In doing so, it repositions the contemporary struggle over meaning in art not as a problem to be overcome, but as a necessary symptom of epistemic plurality.