issue144 刚开始写，求拍

littlefairyhUID: 2775953

“It is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value.”
  critic: a person who evaluates works of art, such as novels, films, music, paintings, etc.
      Is it the artist, not the critic who gives society something of lasting value? Answers are quite different from people to people. As I am concerned, my answer is in the negative. I hold the idea that even though the artists give us something of lasting value, so do the critics.
      It is undoubtedly that the artist gives something of lasting value to the society. First, art works, created by the artists, give people pleasant sensory comforts, such as the portrait work The Mona Lisa’s Smile of Leonardo da Vinci, music of Beethoven etc. They help people to get the access to the beauty of the nature, the society, and the wonderful world, and even some times give people encourages. Second, artists are very creative, they create some particular art works to convey special ideas, emotions, cultures as well as values, and these art works also provide a significant and unique mirror for the society, both for the contemporary one and the future generations'. They use their products to represent society’s present situations, including the appearance of people, the living conditions of the citizens, the special culture and customs and so on. The works of the artists effectively reflect all aspects of the society. In a word, artists have been admittedly providing something of lasting value to the society.
      Even though the artists play an important role in giving something of lasting value to the society, so do the critics. To begin with, critics make a much easier access to the art for ordinary people. Critics with a certain knowledge of art help to conduct the ones with little cognition of art to the art realm. Based on the critics' understanding and interpreting of the art, the beginners will get familiar with the art much more quickly and easily. And then they can appreciate the art by themselves and have deeper insights into those art works. Then, critics help people to save lots of time on selecting the art works. It's quite obvious that people are always engaged in various affairs in modern society. Thus too much time and attention on quite a mass of art works is absolutely impossible for modern individuals. With the help of the critique on the works of art, it takes only a brief moment for people to find out what they really want and need. What's more, artists also reap certain benefits from critics most of the time. Critics help artists to know their works better from different perspectives. Some pertinent proposals will act as catalysts for artists’ growth, and will corresponding result in better art works. Take Alfred Tennyson, a famous English poet of Victorian age, as an example. Arthur Henry Hallam, a person who was not only Tennyson’s best friend, but also his loyal reader as well as the most severe critic of his poems, had great influence on Tennyson's literary life. His earnest criticism, instructive and constructive suggestions helped Tennyson achieve great success in the poetry. Therefore, critics also contribute to give society something of lasting value.
     To sum up, from the above analysis, it’s easy for us to have the conclusion that not only the artists but also the critics can give something of lasting value to the society. Both of them play an important part to the art. The only difference is just the disparate ways that they play.

sunflower_irisUID: 2720580

Is it the artist, not the critic who gives society something of lasting value? Answers are quite different from people to people. As I am concerned, my answer is in the negative. I hold the idea that even though the artists give us something of lasting value, so do the critics.

It is undoubtedly that the artist gives something of lasting value to the society. First, art works, created by the artists, give people pleasant sensory comforts, such as the portrait work The Mona Lisa’s Smile of Leonardo da Vinci, music of Beethoven etc. They help people to get the access to the beauty of the nature, the society, and the wonderful world, and even some times give people encourages. Second, artists are very creative, they create some particular art works to convey special ideas, emotions, cultures as well as values, and these art works also provide a significant and unique mirror for the society, both for the contemporary one and the future generations'（generation）. They use their products to represent society’s present situations, including the appearance of people, the living conditions of the citizens, the special culture and customs and so on. The works of the artists effectively reflect all aspects of the society. In a word, artists have been admittedly providing something of lasting value to the society.

Even though the artists play an important role in giving something of lasting value to the society, so do the critics. To begin with, critics make a much easier access to the art for ordinary people. Critics with a certain knowledge of art help to conduct the ones with little cognition of art to the art realm. Based on the critics' understanding and interpreting of the art, the beginners will get familiar with the art much more quickly and easily. And then they can appreciate the art by themselves and have deeper insights into those art works. Then, critics help people to save lots of time on selecting the art works. It's quite obvious that people are always engaged in various affairs in modern society. Thus too much time and attention on quite a mass of art works is absolutely impossible for modern individuals. With the help of the critique on the works of art, it takes only a brief moment for people to find out what they really want and need. What's more, artists also reap certain benefits from critics most of the time. Critics help artists to know their works better from different perspectives. Some pertinent proposals will act as catalysts for artists’ growth, and will corresponding result in better art works. Take Alfred Tennyson, a famous English poet of Victorian age, as an example. Arthur Henry Hallam, a person who was not only Tennyson’s best friend, but also his loyal reader as well as the most severe critic of his poems, had great influence on Tennyson's literary life. His earnest criticism, instructive and constructive suggestions helped Tennyson achieve great success in the poetry. Therefore, critics also contribute to give society something of lasting value.

To sum up, from the above analysis, it’s easy for us to have the conclusion that not only the artists but also the critics can give something of lasting value to the society. Both of them play an important part to the art. The only difference is just the disparate ways that they play.
我整体来说，我很喜欢你的说理，思路清晰，分析透彻，很好。对于刚开始写的人已经很不错了，想我刚开始写I的时候不知道比你烂了多少倍，呵呵。
有一些问题也要说明，第一段你说的是artists不仅创造了审美享受而且具有社会价值，观点很好，但是在例证方面不够明确。They help people to get the access to the beauty of the nature, the society, and the wonderful world, and even some times give people encourages.比如这一句，但既然你已经举了达芬奇和贝多芬的例子为什么不用例子来说明呢？你可以说蒙娜丽莎表达了达芬奇对人体构造和人类情感的描绘，无论从绘画技巧还是情感表达方面都给予人们无尽的审美享受，并给不同的观者不同的情感共鸣；贝多芬的音乐以其澎湃的气势和深沉的情感描绘出自由的向往、情感的柔美、奋斗的激情等等，不仅创造了审美价值而且在精神上给人鼓舞。这样就比beauty of nature更容易让人接受，是不是？
第二段你说的是critics不仅对读者有益而且对作者有益，但是他们是怎么给予人们last value的呢？在第一点的论述上，你说critics用更专业的角度分析作品让普通读者可以更好地选择作品，这一点的分析很好，但是对给予人们last value的论述并不太加分，是不是可以更深入地说不仅让他们在选择作品中节省了时间，而且发掘出并不为普通读者轻易发现的作品更深刻的价值，并使读者们更好地认识和理解这种价值呢？对作者有益这一点说理和例证都很好，但是还是回到那个last value的问题，就是critics对作品和创作的理解为artists提供了更广阔的角度，他们共同创造了这个last value，你是这个意思对不对？
文章写的不错，但是要记住少些空泛的说理，试着发展你的例证，具体说明观点。

littlefairyhUID: 2775953

真的十分感谢小九哦！看了你的评论，我真的是获益不少啊！我一直觉得我在分析题目的时候，思想不够深刻，用词用句都太浅显，看了别人写的GRE的文章，觉得自己的简直就是小儿科。好像在很久之前就有准备作文的想法，只是每次看着题目，成不了文，觉得无话可说，根本下不了笔，我想可能是我平时积累的少了些，肚子里没货，也导致你所说的文章空洞，没有具体的论证。以后在这方面还要多下功夫，多多请教！！真的很谢谢哦，虽然我知道自己总没有例证，但是感觉还是模糊的，你一番评论，让我一下子透析了自己的缺陷，呵呵，以后还要多多麻烦你，像你请教呢！！呵呵，再次感谢！！ 2# sunflower_iris