[i习作temp] Issue144 牛年的最后一篇习作 by ieyangj08 [复制链接]

ieyangj08
UID：2743219

特级会员

Rank: 6 Rank: 6

声望: 92
寄托币: 2707
注册时间: 2009-12-28
精华: 0
帖子: 38

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2010-2-13 18:42:57 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

本帖最后由 ieyangj08 于 2010-2-13 18:44 编辑

Issue144 "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

After the release movie Avatar, the most popular American film in early 2010, directed by James Cameron, numerous comments and reports appeared in the networks, newspapers and television. Yes, Avatar supported by lots of critics is hot now and has demolished many box office barriers around the world. Who made this success, Cameron or critics? When come to the issue who gives society something of eternal value, artist or critic, I side with the author and hold the belief that timeless classics are created by artists not critics.

To illustrate this viewpoint, we should realize the intrinsic relationship and diversity between the artist and critic firstly. Although their works are both related to arts, such as novels, films, music, etc, there are essential differences between their works. We all know that critic by commenting artist’s work makes living. Without the works of artists, critics will definitely lose their job. If there have never been composers in the world, for instance, then there would never be critics living in the society by commenting symphony, the works of composers. If there have never been writers in the world, there would never be literary critics. So in some extent we could say critics attach themselves as dependents on artists. However, artists, due to the originality of their work, can’t rely on critics to finish their works. Without music critics, composers still can finish their works. Without literary critics, writers still can finish their works. Thus the relation between the artist and critic is not equal, and artist is more vital, for his/her job has more originality.

Another fact that can support my assertion is that more works of artists are left in the world eternally than critics’, even art criticism are a lot more than contemporary art works. There are ample examples of this assertion. In the field of music, for example, one could easily remember masterpieces of Beethoven, the great German composer and one representatives of Vienna classical music, such as Ninth Symphony Chorus, The Fifth Symphony of Density, and Clair de Lune; however, we have little memory of music comments in that time. When mentioning painting, works of Van Gogh easily run into our mind, such as Sunflower, Self-Portrait, and Holding carnations Woman, rather than painting criticism in his period. The explanation for this might be that art comments only play a role in helping people to understand and accept art works, and after people fell in love with these art works, they will leave these real treasures to their posterity other than those comments. Hence we could say art works have more lasting value than art comments.

In conclusion, whether artist or art work are more important than critic or art comments, and the creator of timeless classics in art is artist, not critic.

想不出第三点了，求建议。

回应
0

使用道具举报

zhaohan
UID：2595904

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 3
寄托币: 256
注册时间: 2009-1-29
精华: 0
帖子: 14

沙发

发表于 2010-2-14 23:26:40 |只看该作者

After the release movie Avatar, the most popular American film in early 2010, directed by James Cameron, numerous comments and reports appeared in the networks, newspapers and television. Yes, Avatar supported by lots of critics is hot now and has demolished many box office barriers around the world. Who made this success, Cameron or critics? When come to the issue who gives society something of eternal value, artist or critic, I side with the author and hold the belief that timeless classics are created by artists not critics, (GOOD INTRO.!)

To illustrate this viewpoint, we should realize the intrinsic relationship and diversity between the artist and critic firstly. Although their works are both related to arts, such as novels, films, music, etc, there are essential differences between their works. We all know that critic by commenting artist’s work makes living. (MAKES LIVING BY COMMENTING ARTIST’S WORK)Without the works of artists, critics will definitely lose their job. If there have never been composers in the world, for instance, then there would never be critics living in the society by commenting symphony, the works of composers. If there have never been writers in the world, there would never be literary critics.(两句话没有特别明显的排比效果，建议合成一句) So in some extent we could say critics attach themselves as dependents（adj?） on artists. However, artists, due to the originality of their work, can’t rely on critics to finish their works. Without music critics, composers still can finish their works. Without literary critics, writers still can finish their works. Thus the relation between the artist and critic is not equal, and artist is more vital, for his/her job has more originality.

Another fact that can support my assertion is that more works of artists are left in the world eternally than critics’, even art criticism are a lot more than contemporary art works. There are ample examples of this assertion. In the field of music, for example, one could easily remember masterpieces of Beethoven, the great German composer and one representatives of Vienna classical music, such as Ninth Symphony Chorus, The Fifth Symphony of Density, and Clair de Lune; however, we have little memory of music comments in that time. When mentioning painting, works of Van Gogh easily run into our mind, such as Sunflower, Self-Portrait, and Holding carnations Woman, rather than painting criticism in his period. The explanation for this might be that art comments only play a role in helping people to understand and accept art works, and after people fell in love with these art works, they will leave these real treasures to their posterity other than those comments. Hence we could say art works have more lasting value than art comments.

In conclusion, whether artist or art work are more important than critic or art comments, and the creator of timeless classics in art is artist, not critic.

想不出第三点了，求建议。
嗯。。我觉得你的b1是个挺好的论述，第二段的话最后两句有点偏，我个人认为不能说因为批评家们只是帮我们了解和接受就不重要吧。。因为没有了解和接受怎么谈得上对于社会的永恒价值呢？我也写了这篇文章，不过观点跟你的不太一样，麻烦帮我看看吧，也希望我的某一段的思路能帮你相处第三段来，
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=1060748&extra=