Issue 144 艺术家和评论家关系

annkeUID: 2605122

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: 868
TIME: 01:20:00
DATE: 2010-7-14 10:33:49


I concede the speaker's respect of artist, but the sophisticated relationship between critic and the artist renders my reservation on the reject of the value of critics.

Art, as Freud defined, is the release of personal lust, reflecting the deep emotion, desire of artists. Under this definition, an artwork, first and foremost, connect with the individual expression rather than the outside world effects, and innovatively created by artists who obtain a genius to utilize various techniques--such as painting, fresco, , writing, sculpture, photography etc. Therefore, thanks for artists giving society something of lasting value are wise and reasonable.

Furthermore, the lasting value of artwork, born by extraordinary efforts of artists, initially shed a light on beauty. The melodious Moonlight Sonata would never exist without the excellent imagination of Beethoven; Mona Lisa won't be regard as the most mysterious and charming woman in history without masterly manipulating hues and lines by the Leonardo da Vinci; and people hardly seize an cherishing opportunity to acclaim the human being's strength and healthy body without the sculpture David created by the Renaissance Man-Michelangelo. Thus, to gain more advanced aesthetic experience, society should attach more appreciation and respect to artists.

Secondly, there is a myth of artworks, wonderful, vivid, profound and powerful, that provide useful instruction and bring our society to a better living world. Literature is an typical sphere illustrating arts' didatic functions. Through attractive plots developing, Shakespeare's Macbeth clearly emphasize the deleterious effects of overflowed ambition. The notable book of War and Peace, written by Leo Tolstoy, alarmed human beings that wars necessarily damage both rivals and only aiming at harmonious cooperation will the nations and society approach
prosperity.
Besides literature, other forms of artworks have the ability to penetrate phenomena and reveal the truth of society.
Picasso's masterpiece--Guernica aggressively demonstrate the evil of wars and fascism, in which human’s nature distort; and the Statue of Liberty firmly persist in the harbor of Manhattan of New York, keep an eternal calling for freedom, equality, and respects of individuals, which seemly become the determination and the sign of a new America. Although never an accurate analysis can be conducted to report how extensive the influences of arts, the willingness of talking artists' life stories, visiting museums, taking picture of famous sculptures and attending performances have evidenced art's long lasting social values.

However, the contribution of artists do not necessarily erase the value of critics. First of all, the latter, like the bridges or ribbons, link the artists with audience, or readers. Good or bad, the popularity of an artwork greatly shape its value and longevity. The responsibility of a qualified critic, equipped with professional knowledge of techniques and backgrounds, is to introduce excellent artworks into the view of audience, setting people more opportunities to admire arts lacking public attention. For example, the exceptional novel-- Ulysses, written by an Irish author--Joyce James, faced an indifferent attitude from customers blaming to its obscure metaphors and the application of the stream of consciousness. However, the turning point occurred after a fierce discussion and critiques of critics, and finally this book enjoyed a sales booming and even received the human being's highest intellectual reward--Noble Prize. In this way, artists, always figured with a lack of business brain and administrative skills, not only benefit from the promotion of book sales, but also attain a feedback from critics rending them a recognition of their work in other people's eyes which probably help improve the quality of future works.
From my point of view, critics work as a crucial role in leading public attention and clarifying the difficulty, a typical characteristic of masterpieces, in understanding.

Nevertheless, the extent in which critics bring positive influence on artist can barely be overstated. On the one hand, history abounds with such tragedies that it is critics' blindness and misunderstanding that cast artists in hardships. For instance, Van Gogh, two of whose paintings sold at the highest prices in the history of audition, $50 million, only sold one piece during his life time. When he alive, critics sneered at Van Gogh and rejected his works as a byproduct of insanity, which drove our genius, poor and pressured, bitterly ended with a self-shot. Not come singly but in pairs, Monet endured the similar experience. On the other hand, the truth is that the audience encounter with the artworks independently rather than under the guidance of alleged professionals. It is obviously ridiculous that only after gaining sufficient knowledge about the instruments and musical styles can a listener begin to admire an opera. If it is this case, the purpose of art has been totally forgotten, a purpose to strike a person’s emotion and cause a spiritual resonance rather than examining the level of techniques information.

In a nut shell, admittedly, the long lasting value in society irrefutably accredit to the artists’ excellent job, containing his passion, sacrifice, perspiration, and inspiration, but the critics can make a difference whether catalyze or inhibit the spreading the value. In modern society, as multi-cultural trend unprecedentedly expand, translation and assistance of critics become more and more significant, which at best help preserve diverse, especially inglorious art forms, at least voluntarily compensate customers’ necessities at times.

figuechenUID: 2850619

占位先

figuechenUID: 2850619

大概看了一下，建议作者把自己的文章贴到Word里，然后开启语法和单词检查功能，文章的前半部分有不少语法错误，建议自行修改吧。

文章分别剖析了艺术家和批评家的作用，然后得出结论既不能否定也不应夸大批评家在艺术中的作用。文章写得很辩证，思路相当清晰，例子也很详实。看得出来作者是花费了一番苦心的。

但缺点是文章在前半部分写艺术家的作用的时候，分了两段，分别说艺术能带来美和艺术能给社会以启发和教导。但怎么都感觉这两段是艺术的作用，而不是艺术家的作用。在这两段中，作者也只是用排比的形式铺陈了许多艺术作品的事例，但并没有展开详细说明在某件艺术作品中，艺术家到底做了哪些工作。只是在结尾草草地来了一句艺术家也许做了很多工作，颇有敷衍之感。作者也没有写出如果不是批评家，那又到底是谁决定了艺术究竟是好是坏，未能深入地揭开批评家作用的本质。

在我看来，是所有艺术的欣赏者，也就是人民，决定了艺术的优劣。艺术家的作用是创造作品，而批评家的作用是给艺术家提供修改建议，给人民宣传这些作品。最终决定艺术是否能恒久流传的还是人民。我觉得这样写，可能能更好地反映出批评家和艺术家对艺术作品的贡献。

仅仅是个人意见啦~欢迎讨论~也恳请互拍同题作文：
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1125731-1-1.html

lihonglei222UID: 2780062

我看了一下你的文章，我感觉写的很多。我不太清楚你用了多长时间。我的作文，一直是一个美国朋友（literature Master)帮我改的，几个重要的地方：simple, clear, strong 实话说，我感觉你的词汇水平很高，是我不能比的。我马上也就考作文了。加油。