欢迎拍砖，有拍必回~Issue144【六人行小组8.7】by xyjprc

xyjprcUID: 2412778

感谢前来拍砖的同学~使劲拍论证吧~！
没限时，就当积累论据吧。
再也不写art类了。。。写伤了。。。

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: 693
TIME: 01:20:00
DATE: 8/9/2010 5:11:01 PM

An artwork is usually surrounded with a group of critics, who offer their own evaluation of this work. One may wonder that whether the artist or the critic gives society some eternal value. As far as I am concerned, the artist and the critic are both indispensable to providing the society with real valuable things, for the artist offers the originality of beauty and the critic picks the most wonderful ones for us.

The contribution of critics should not be underestimated. Not long after human beings resolved their problem for finding food and shelter, they began to create various kinds of artworks. Although we now have countless pieces of artwork nowadays, there are only a small proportion of them are really valuable and worth being appreciated by the public. It is the critics that evaluate these artworks, make comparisons, and finally elect the most valuable ones. Say, if a collector would like to buy some artworks with real value, what he must do is to read all relative comments by the critics before he makes any decision. Another example is IMDb (The Internet Movie Database), the biggest online rating cite for movies with a group of experienced critics that rate movies. The fact is that according to the website's statistics, the highly rated movies are always favored by the majority. Many movie fans are used to check the IMDb rating to judge whether the film worth watching and this phenomenon proves the importance of critics. An essential function of movies, together with other forms of art like novels and music, are to bring a good feeling to people, and that is where their value lies in. Thus, critics could select the ones with lasting value for us, and their effort should not be neglected.

However, critics' comments may be misleading, especially for those revolutionary artworks. It is common sense that criticism is a common aspect of all human expression and needs not necessarily imply skilled or accurate expression of judgment. Some critics' ability to comprehend the beauty hidden in the artworks is much lower than the artists' ability to create beauty, and the comments made by those critics would not reflect the value of the artwork. This is particularly true when it comes to revolutionary artworks. Vincent van Gogh drew more than 2,000 paintings, and his works were exhibited in some galleries. To his disappointment, there were no contemporaries that could comprehend his paintings, and he sold only one painting in his lifetime. In this way, his really revolutionary masterpieces were underestimated. The reason is that the critics are always making comments on the basis of existing values and rules. When the truly subversive piece comes about, it is more likely to be criticized as weird. In other words, if an artist follows all the suggestions of critics, what he makes can only be judged as a craftwork that meets the criteria of contemporaries, but never an artwork with originality.

Moreover, most artworks with truly lasting value would directly arouse the good feeling in every one who tries to feel them. As the saying goes, if it is gold, it shines. The inner value of any artwork would not change under any commentaries. The masterpieces could usually strike the deep heart of those who try to appreciate them: anyone that listens to Beethoven's "Symphony Destiny" would be affected by its grandeur; anyone that looks at Leonardo's "Mona Lisa" would be enchanted by the mysterious smile; anyone that reads Victor Hugo's "Les Miserables" would cry for the miserable life of Jean Valjean. [True appreciation of art occurs at the moment we encounter them; it is the emotional, even visceral impact that art has on our senses, spirits, and souls that is the real value of art.此句抄的北美范文，写得实在太好了。。。] Those commentaries, even with strongest words, seem pale compared with the original beauty of artworks.

In a conclusion, artists and critics supplement each other. As time passes, the greatest works are those which are created by artists and evaluated by critics which draw people's attention towards those works.

odiehereUID: 2502172

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: 693
TIME: 01:20:00
DATE: 8/9/2010 5:11:01 PM

An artwork is usually surrounded [这个词给人感觉“围观”的样子。。。改用什么词好呢？我也暂时想不起来]with a group of critics, who offer their own evaluation of this work. One may wonder that whether the artist or the critic gives society some eternal value. As far as I am concerned, the artist and the critic are both indispensable to providing the society with real valuable things, for the artist offers the originality of beauty and the critic picks the most wonderful ones for us[嗯 这个观点表达的好].

The contribution of critics should not be underestimated. Not long after human beings resolved their problem for finding food and shelter, they began to create various kinds of artworks. Although we now have countless pieces of artwork nowadays, there are only a small proportion of them [who]are really valuable and worth being appreciated by the public. It is the critics that evaluate these artworks, make comparisons, and finally elect the most valuable ones. Say, if a collector would like to buy some artworks with real value, what he must do is to read all relative comments by the critics before he makes any decision. Another example is IMDb (The Internet Movie Database), the biggest online rating cite for movies with a group of experienced critics that rate movies. The fact is that according to the website's statistics, the highly rated movies are always favored by the majority. Many movie fans are used to check the IMDb rating to judge whether the film worth watching and this phenomenon proves the importance of critics[dmdb 这个例子好啊，其实也可以从这点发展出来这样的观点：critics are not always professional experts on arts, staying away from common people, on the contrary, we are often unconsciously serving as critics ourselves, by commenting on movies, novels, music, etc on social websites like imdb and providing useful suggestions to others.]. An essential function of movies, together with other forms of art like novels and music, are to bring a good feeling to people, and that is where their value lies in. Thus, critics could select the ones with lasting value for us, and their effort should not be neglected.

However, critics' comments may be misleading, especially for those revolutionary artworks. It is common sense that criticism is a common aspect of all human expression and needs not necessarily imply skilled or accurate expression of judgment. Some critics' ability to comprehend the beauty hidden in the artworks is much lower than the artists' ability to create beauty, and the comments made by those critics would not reflect the value of the artwork. This is particularly true when it comes to revolutionary artworks. Vincent van Gogh drew more than 2,000 paintings, and his works were exhibited in some galleries. To his disappointment, there were no contemporaries that could comprehend his paintings, and he sold only one painting in his lifetime. In this way, his really revolutionary masterpieces were underestimated. The reason is that the critics are always making comments on the basis of existing values and rules. When the truly subversive piece comes about, it is more likely to be criticized as weird. In other words, if an artist follows all the suggestions of critics, what he makes can only be judged as a craftwork that meets the criteria of contemporaries, but never an artwork with originality[嗯 大家也还是少用梵高吧，看看用舒伯特怎样].

Moreover, most artworks with truly lasting value would directly arouse the good feeling in every one who tries to feel them. As the saying goes, if it is gold, it shines. The inner value of any artwork would not change under any commentaries. The masterpieces could usually strike the deep heart of those who try to appreciate them: anyone that listens to Beethoven's "Symphony Destiny" would be affected by its grandeur; anyone that looks at Leonardo's "Mona Lisa" would be enchanted by the mysterious smile; anyone that reads Victor Hugo's "Les Miserables" would cry for the miserable life of Jean Valjean. [True appreciation of art occurs at the moment we encounter them; it is the emotional, even visceral impact that art has on our senses, spirits, and souls that is the real value of art.此句抄的北美范文，写得实在太好了。。。] Those commentaries, even with strongest words, seem pale compared with the original beauty of artworks[这一段跟第二段有矛盾呀。主要是遣词太绝对了（连用几个anyone）；或者想办法在逻辑上过度一下，说明好的作品只要能被critics推介出去，就能大放异彩；或者好的作品即使不被当时的critics认可，未来也一定会被发现价值。主要是看你的主题怎么定了].

In a conclusion, artists and critics supplement each other. As time passes, the greatest works are those which are created by artists and evaluated by critics which draw people's attention towards those works.
[文章的逻辑有点misleading。首先，在开头段里，你的定调是：artists和critics共同推介了艺术的长久价值，但是在第二段描述critics的重要性后，第三段开始反驳critics的可靠度，第四段更是有“酒香不怕巷子深”的意思，但最后一段的总结又和开头呼应。有一个很好的建议，来自北美范文书，就是如果对自己的脉络组织不够确定，可以先写主体，再写开头，就避免不照应的情况了。]

xyjprcUID: 2412778

嗯~~~感谢Odie的建议~~~非常有收获呀~！
这篇文章的结构，呃，的确不太好，我本来是想用这种结构：

平衡观点
A重要
过度A有害
B同样重要，没B不行
综上找平衡，按AB平衡发展

但现在我觉得你说得也很有道理，这种结构很容易把自己驳倒
所以还是这样写？

A理由
B理由
AB同时，理由

odiehereUID: 2502172

那就这样写呗：
artists还是最重要
不过critics也比较重要
只是critics经常有毛病，所以才不如artists重要
综上，artists确实重要，然而并不能因为critics有毛病就忽视他们的作用

你看行不行？
主要是说话不能太绝对，要留下余地。我的文章也有类似的错误，被你指正了。谢谢哈~