[i习作temp] Issue144【fighting-GRE-0706G】4.1 第十八次作业 [复制链接]

yudingo
UID：2308898

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 664
注册时间: 2007-3-4
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-4-2 16:11:22 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

144. "It is the artist, not the critic,* who gives society something of lasting value." [60]
*a person who evaluates works of art, such as novels, films, music, paintings, etc.

Art, as Freud said, is a kind of release of individual lust, converting the human libido into plentiful creativity. Artist and critic are always counterparts since the beginning of art. However, is it the former, not the latter, who gives society something of lasting value, as the author claims? As far as I am concerned, it is arbitrary to say so.

What we should admit firstly is that it is artist who is creating the art, if it were not for which the issue would be of no sense. During the evolutionary history of art, artists and their works have being played great role in our society. Their major contribution, as I say, is to help people better understand and appreciate beauty and humanity. Da Vinci’s patting, Mona Lisa, which is famous for Mona Lisa’s mystic and amazing smile, is considered as an art work of lasting value and gives people great pleasure in enjoying the beauty and always demonstrated Da Vinci’s creativity. Beethoven, a well known German composer and musician, created lots of great symphonies during his life, which are highly evaluated as “the last word on human endurance”. His works, such as The Fifth Symphony, the Finale of the Ninth Symphony and the “moonlight” sonata, reflected human’s desires for beauty and dream. Even in modern society, the role of artist cannot be neglectable. The famous movie series, Star wars, have successfully roused people’s desires in exploring the universe and taking care of our earth, and is regarded as a marker in movie history.

Meanwhile, we should not neglect the contribution of critics. They are not the creators of art, but they are professional appreciators. Their roles in giving the society something of lasting value deserve our notice. For one thing, because most audiences lack the ability to distinguish what is real beautiful and what is not concerning art works, critics could conduct them appreciate art in a valuable and professional eye. Here I would take the instance of Quixote, which was primarily regarded as an utterly funny and valueless novel. However, it was critics who challenged the traditional estimation that finally made the world realize the real value of Quixote and consider it as one of the best Spanish novels. For another thing, critics and their evaluations could make artists understand what are really welcomed by contemporary society and to encourage them create more significant and valuable works. This is especially important for modern art. For example, it is critics’ efforts, or at least most of which, that promote the popularity of science fiction novels.

Besides, from the historical perspective, we could see that during the whole history of art, artists and critics were always combined with each other, just like they were twins. It is artists who create art works and leave the society something valuable; and it is always critics who distinguish what are real valuable and what are harmful of these works and teach our society to appreciate art in a professional view. To better encourage the development of art, we should welcome both artists to concentrating on creating and critics to continuing make their evaluations to art works. The only thing we should pay attention to is to prevent critics from over-using their rights to evaluate art works which would cause misleading opinions.

In sum, both artists and critics are necessary for the healthy development of art, only when we encourage both of which, would the society benefit from something of lasting value.

[ 本帖最后由 yudingo 于 2007-4-2 19:55 编辑 ]