cherry习作每日一篇，欢迎提意见和建议！目标4分。ISSUE144

cherryxixiUID: 2935282

144, 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.

  

Does the artist or the critic give society something of perpetual value？ The writer asserts that it is the artist instead of the critic. I strongly agree with the writer based on the form of the art and the culture created by the art. Meanwhile, I think critic also play a significant part in the development of the art.

The first reason why it is the art who gives society something of perpetual value is the form of art. We all know that art itself is abstract. However, the carrier of art can be seen and tangible as well as be saved. So the thought of the artist can be saved by the concrete form of the art. For example, book is the concrete form for the literature. Book can be saved easily and for a long time. Therefore, the value created by the thought of the artist can be saved perpetually. When coming to other forms of art, it is also right. Music, for example, is another expressing form of art which can be saved from singing by generations. Only when the world and the human disappear, the music will disappear. So art gives the society something of perpetual value by its lasting expressing forms.

The other reason is that art creates a specially culture which is more lasting to society. Culture is a common action and broadcasts by generations. For example, Beijing opera is an old Beijing culture which is popular from ancient Chinese. It also has become one of important symbols of Beijing. So it is many artists of Beijing opera who makes this unique culture saved for a lasting time. Based on this point, I concede that art gives the society something perpetual value.

However, critics sometimes have a chilling effect on the art too. Firstly, as we look back, the critique from critics makes artist progress. For example, when a new book comes out, there must be critics. They condemn the content of the book and pick out the errors in book. The writer has to retrospect and may publish new fixing one. Secondly, looking forward, we can find that sometimes critics give the artist new inspiration to create more and more excellent work in the future. Therefore it is useful to our perpetual value building. For example, when a film is firstly on screen, there will be many people to set obstacles and question to the director. For explaining, next new film may be born subsequently.

In sum, I think that the art does give the society something lasting value by the concrete forms of art and the culture making by art. However, critics are also helpful for the progress of the artist. only can overdue critics  not be benefit to the development of the art.

cherryxixiUID: 2935282

怎么木有人捏。。

wdvrdx111UID: 2870800

····逻辑有点乱，既然critic对art发展很重要，那么他们为什么就和lasting value没有关系？按照你最后的论证来说，应该是有联系的，但是你开头是附和题目的，这点很纠结； 例证不够具体，说服力不够强，给什么书啊，电影啊取个名字也好啊···诶，4分很难·