寄托家园留学论坛 › 论坛 › 寄托学术类备考版 › GRE作文互动版 › Issue144 艺术家与批评家，互砸请进！

返回列表

查看: 755|回复: 5

[i习作temp] Issue144 艺术家与批评家，互砸请进！ [复制链接]

css
UID: 173612

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 1613
注册时间: 2004-8-7
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-7-18 12:09:47 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Issue144 第10篇我爱砖头
------题目------
It is the artist, not the critic,* who gives society something of lasting value.
*a person who evaluates works of art, such as novels, films, music, paintings, etc.
------正文------
What is the lasting value of art? In my opinion, it is the creative imagination and common emotion involved in the art works which are created by the artists, but not the comments on its value which are put on the common masses by the critics. Based on this point, I agree with the speaker although the critics have their other contribution to the society.

To begin with, it is obvious to see that art works are created by the artists, not the critics. Artists are the direct contributors to bring the lasting value to the world. If there are no critics in the world, the great art works can still perpetuate by humans. But if there are no artists, the critics will lose the meaning of existence. As a matter of fact, we can enjoy the beauty of Mona Lisa without finding out what is the true purpose of Vinci to paint it. Just like we can enjoy a feast without understanding what the function of every dish is. Thus ignoring the criticism and its originator cannot effect the appreciation of an art work.

Furthermore, the critics actually keep us from understanding the deep value of the art works someway. An art work, which is congealed with the beauty of the artist's emotion and imagination, is sometimes beyond the ability of language to express. Since language has its own limitation to deliver the insight of arts, even if the critics understand the far-reaching meaning of the art works, they can not express it exactly to others, not to mention the critics may be also confined to their thought mode. When an art work is peeled through the comments, the impact of the art on us which act as a whole will be undermined and our experience to apperceive the art work emotionally and spiritually may be deprived of by the language.

What is more, the comments from the critics on art works also damage the creation of lasting value of arts. It is in the art area that the repetition must be abandoned, while what the critics bring to art area is just the repetition and unification. For instance, the film producers may get the feedback of a movie is most likely from a few kinds of criticisms as if they are the voice of the public, and then adjust it to cater to the so-called appetite of the masses. As a result, the films are all the same because they are produced according to a few thoughts. The same thing happens in the popular novels, music and paintings. Over the long haul, the monotony must be a catastrophe to art.

Admittedly, the criticisms have some social function which has little relevance to art. In distinguishing the true art and the lavatorial art, it is the critics who provide the criteria to the masses who are not professional enough to discard the ill art. Therefore, the contribution of critics lies in the function of cultivating the masses but not cultivating the artists.

To sum up, the artists are the real ones who provide society of lasting value, while the critics, without contribution to art, are actually the preventers of the development of arts, although their merits are in other areas but art.

我见青山多妩媚，
料青山
见我应如是

回应
0

使用道具举报

godspell
UID: 177241

超级会员

Rank: 7 Rank: 7 Rank: 7

声望: 81
寄托币: 6573
注册时间: 2004-9-4
精华: 0
帖子: 226

沙发

发表于 2005-7-18 15:42:34 |只看该作者

What is the lasting value of art? In my opinion, it is the creative imagination and common emotion involved in the art works which are created by the artists, but not the comments on its value which are put on the common masses by the critics. Based on this point, I agree with the speaker although the critics have their other contribution to the society.

To begin with, it is obvious to see that art works are created by the artists, not the critics. Artists are the direct contributors to bring the lasting value to the world（这里应该是art吧？是艺术家赐予了艺术品价值啊）. If there are no critics in the world, the great art works can still perpetuate by humans.（不一定啊，也有可能没有批评家的鉴赏，一些有价值的作品被埋没，毕竟大众在艺术方面是外行，缺乏专业的艺术素养） But if there are no artists, the critics will lose the meaning of existence. As a matter of fact, we can enjoy the beauty of Mona Lisa without finding out what is the true purpose of Vinci to paint it. Just like we can enjoy a feast without understanding what the function of every dish is. Thus ignoring the criticism and its originator cannot effect the appreciation of an art work.

Furthermore, the critics actually keep us from understanding the deep value of the art works someway. An art work, which is congealed with the beauty of the artist's emotion and imagination, is sometimes beyond the ability of language to express. Since language has its own limitation to deliver the insight of arts, even if the critics understand the far-reaching meaning of the art works, they can not express it exactly to others, not to mention the critics may be also confined to their thought mode. When an art work is peeled through the comments, the impact of the art on us which act as a whole will be undermined and our experience to apperceive the art work emotionally and spiritually may be deprived of by the language.

What is more, the comments from the critics on art works also（这里用“可能”这个词比较好，不一定是damage） damage the creation of lasting value of arts. It is in the art area that the repetition must be abandoned, while what the critics bring to art area is just the repetition and unification. For instance, the film producers may get the feedback of a movie is most likely from a few kinds of criticisms as if they are the voice of the public, and then adjust it to cater to the so-called appetite of the masses. As a result, the films are all the same because they are produced according to a few thoughts. The same thing happens in the popular novels, music and paintings. Over the long haul, the monotony must be a catastrophe to art.

Admittedly, the criticisms have some social function which has little relevance to art. In distinguishing the true art and the lavatorial art, it is the critics who provide the criteria to the masses who are not professional enough to discard the ill art. Therefore, the contribution of critics lies in the function of cultivating the masses but not cultivating the artists.

To sum up, the artists are the real ones who provide society of lasting value, while the critics, without contribution to art, are actually the preventers of the development of arts, although their merits are in other areas but art.
还不错
论证方面还应该加油，多看看范文，还有这方面的资料，肯定会对自己大有帮助哦~~ :D
:D:D:D:D

使用道具举报

godspell
UID: 177241

超级会员

Rank: 7 Rank: 7 Rank: 7

声望: 81
寄托币: 6573
注册时间: 2004-9-4
精华: 0
帖子: 226

板凳

发表于 2005-7-18 15:43:19 |只看该作者

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=301931
正巧这篇文章我也写了，帮我改改吧，谢谢~~

使用道具举报

css
UID: 173612

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 1613
注册时间: 2004-8-7
精华: 0
帖子: 0

地板

发表于 2005-7-18 18:17:45 |只看该作者

谢谢楼上的！

论证方面的缺点能具体说说吗？多谢！

你文章思路跟我好像很不一样的……

我见青山多妩媚，
料青山
见我应如是

使用道具举报

godspell
UID: 177241

超级会员

Rank: 7 Rank: 7 Rank: 7

声望: 81
寄托币: 6573
注册时间: 2004-9-4
精华: 0
帖子: 226

5楼

发表于 2005-7-18 18:56:47 |只看该作者

我认为第一段论证还要改一下，说理不太透彻，有些我在括号里写了。你第二段是讲批评家使大众明白艺术家作品的含义，第三段说有些不适当的评价会使得艺术品价值得到削弱。后面三段论证还行。

使用道具举报

逆风飞羊
UID: 182440

荣誉版主

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9

声望: 5
寄托币: 16075
注册时间: 2004-10-16
精华: 12
帖子: 9

6楼

发表于 2005-7-18 19:01:52 |只看该作者

你的意思是不是说:1是艺术家创造了艺术品而不是评论家,所以艺术家有lasting value
2.评论家阻碍我们认识艺术的深刻内涵,因为他们的语言无法表达作品的深刻含义
3.评论家阻碍创新
4的确评论家和艺术没关系,只是在影响大众.

我觉得你论证的有点问题,第二段没大问题,第三段你只强调了语言比较无力,可是我们的交流都是靠语言啊,就是艺术家本身也要和观众和媒体交流的.所以应该说说思维方面的限制.
第四段观点是可以的,但是我觉得没说清楚.关键问题是评论家可以影响大众和投资商的喜好进而影响作品的自由度,而不是只因为他们人数少.
4 艺术的lasting value不可能和观众\社会割裂开,评论家影响大众是和艺术有紧密联系的.所以我个人认为没必要在这里把让步定义的这么狭隘.

刚好我也写了这篇,希望你帮着看看见笑啦
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... p;page=1#pid1628542

使用道具举报