=七月流火=小组第3次小组作业 ISSUE144 by lghscu

lghscuUID: 2552043

TOPIC: 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.
WORDS: 506
TIME: 01:30:00
DATE: 2009-8-27 20:10:10

The statement claims that something of lasting value is given to society not by those critics, but those artists. I strongly agree with it. Because it maybe true that critics would play a role in the process of people's understanding of art works, however,
it has some negative effects on art works.
The critic is indispensable in helping people get the essence of the art works. Art works, originating from people's daily life, are difficult for people to understand, let alone appreciate in that they are some kinds of abstract language of artists to express their emotions, thoughts or opinions toward a certain thing. Does anyone can immediately understand the 'sun flowers' painted by Van Gogh? Are there many people able to know what 'Walden' tells wrote by Thoreau? These answers would be not! Therefore, it is the critic who reads these art works and make their opinions open to the public, instructing the populace how to read the books, or how to have a deep insight into the paintings. It is the critic who opens a door for the public to appreciate the art works. Therefore, from this perspective, the critic does give the society a way to lasting value but not the lasting value itself.
However, it is the artist who makes a contribution to the lasting value for the society. A playwrighter writes a wonderful play for theatres just like the greatest one, Shakespeare for 'Romeo and Juliet'; A composer composes a melodious notes, taking Beethoven's 9 Symphonies for example; A painter paints a fabulous painting, such as Da Vinci's Mona Lisa. These artists pour their authentic passions, unique impulses and spirits into the art works, where the lasting value lies in taking the form of authentic beauty, moving melody and charming smile. Only art work having this attribute could be passed from one generation to anther. Only value of this kind for an art work could be appreciated by the society one day. Therefore, the statement would be acceptable when considering aspects discussed.
In addition, sometimes the critic distorts the meaning of the art works, let alone giving the socitey something of lasting value. The critic comments the art works according to their knowledge and their understanding of the art works. Consequently, something different from the originality is added. If so, how could we get the conclusion that they convey lasting value to the society? Furthermore, the critic are under certain circumstances different from the creator of the art works. Sometimes they make a comment under pressure for pleasing the government or some other authorities while most of creating of the art works not. Therefore, the society could not get the essence of the art works from the critic in most cases.
In sum, although the critic makes us easier to understand the art works, the lasting value of the art works given to the society is not performed by them, but by the artist who provides the invaluable and unique works for the contemporaries and the future generation of the society.