Issue144 木耳点评

jxkingUID：141801

ISSUE144. "It is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value."

Whether it is the artist, rather than the critic, who contributes something of great and lasting value for our society? As a matter of fact, this issue is a complex and controversial one. Different people may hold different view points due to their own backgrounds and life experiences. Therefore, there is not a universal answer to this question, whether one choice takes precedence over another may quite depend on specific situation. However, as far as I am concerned, I insist that both artists and critics place an important influence on bequeathing valuable works to our society.

To begin with, many artists who create art works serve, in the same way, as critic who appreciate and identify art works. An artist keeps certain standards in his mind when he sets down to figure his art works. Although their respective criteria may be similar or reverse in some conditions owing to different value systems and estate standings, they do exist. For example, our gifted leader, Chairman Mao had composed numerous poems, which exhibit his ambition, intelligence, confidence, intelligence, activeness, courage and other characteristics, which played an important role in encouraging soldiers and generals during the wars as well as benefited himself. Meanwhile, he also acted as critic by finishing the commenting the Chinese famous history works, "History of twenty-four dynasties ". Under this circumstance, his extensive and profound knowledge that make him bear tow-fold identity: the artist and the critic.

In addition, most valuable works are created by artists, meanwhile it is through identification and criticism which is conducted by critics that they are acknowledged by society. It is undoubtedly that the artists create art works, including painting, music, play, poetry, essay, story and so on. However, not all these works are worthy, not mentioning to those of lasting value. In fact, many of works are worthless, and share little significant standing in the long history. It is through the identification of critic that the works of most precious and lasting valuable are picked up. As one Chinese famous scholar in literature once said that, "It is a plenty of history that cultivates a few artists, and it is a great many artists that create a few works that remain influential and prestigious." This adage is full of wisdom and substantially indicates that those works of lasting value must have experienced the examination and selection by critics.

Last but not least, the artist and the critic play a synergic effect on art works. There is no doubt that the artists are the essential sources of art works. Without artists, there would be not art for critics to comment. However, suppose that our society is short of critics, then artists would get lost when they are composing art works, because there is no standards and guidance for them to follow. Thus a lot of time-consuming and little-appreciated works would be produced. In fact, it is critics who, to a great extent, help artists get advanced. Vice verse, it is artists who, in some sense, help critics get progressed.

In summary, while some people may remain unconvinced, the reasons that I have analyzed in above argument should at least make them aware of the complexities of the issue under discussion. There is no doubt that more and more people will come to realize that neither artists nor critics can beme of lasting value for our society.

-------------------------------------Thank you for evaluation!

木耳UID：123036

ISSUE144. "It is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value."

Whether it is the artist, rather than the critic, who contributes something of great and lasting value for our society? As a matter of fact, this issue is a complex and controversial one. Different people may hold different view points due to their own backgrounds and life experiences. Therefore, there is not a universal answer to this question, whether one choice takes precedence over another may quite depend on specific situation. However, as far as I am concerned, I insist that both artists and critics place an important influence on bequeathing valuable works to our society.

这样的开头我不是很喜欢。首先是罗嗦，再有就牵扯到雷同作弊的问题。现在ets判得很紧，上次作文很多人分数很低不乏这样的原因。你这样的开头都被人用滥了。

To begin with, many artists who create art works serve, in the same way, as critic who appreciate and identify art works. An artist keeps certain standards in his mind when he sets down to figure his art works. Although their respective criteria may be similar or reverse in some conditions owing to different value systems and estate standings, they do exist. For example, our gifted leader, Chairman Mao had composed numerous poems, which exhibit his ambition, intelligence, confidence, intelligence, activeness, courage and other characteristics, which played an important role in encouraging soldiers and generals during the wars（这里这样讲不太好。一些有知识的将领可能还识字。其他的小兵有几个认字的？更别提诗歌了） as well as benefited himself. Meanwhile, he also acted as critic by finishing the commenting the Chinese famous history works, "History of twenty-four dynasties ". Under this circumstance, his extensive and profound knowledge that（删掉that) make him bear tow-fold identity: the artist and the critic.

用词句式都不错，看得出你语言功底很不错。不过单看第一段总觉得这个论点和你的总观点有些偏离。最后如果回到关键gives society something of lasting value就好了

In addition, most valuable works are created by artists, meanwhile it is through identification and criticism which is （负数）conducted by critics that they are acknowledged by society.（这个从句我觉得多余） It is undoubtedly that the artists create art works, including painting, music, play, poetry, essay, story and so on. However, not all these works are worthy, not mentioning to those of lasting value. In fact, many of works are worthless, and share little significant standing in the long history. It is through the identification of critic that the works of most precious and lasting valuable are picked up. As one Chinese famous scholar in literature once said that, "It is a plenty of history that cultivates a few artists, and it is a great many artists that create a few works that remain influential and prestigious." This adage is full of wisdom and substantially indicates that those works of lasting value must have experienced the examination and selection by critics.

讲的有些笼统了，如果能有确切的例子或是把pick up 的标准讲清楚就好了。

Last but not least, the artist and the critic play a synergic effect on art works. There is no doubt that the artists are the essential sources of art works. Without artists, there would be not art for critics to comment. However, suppose that our society is short of critics, then artists would get lost when they are composing art works, because there is no standards and guidance for them to follow.（未必如此吧？对于艺术，似乎从来都是艺术的原创在前，而评论家和后人的归纳总结在后） Thus a lot of time-consuming and little-appreciated works would be produced. In fact, it is critics who, to a great extent, help artists get advanced. Vice verse, it is artists who, in some sense, help critics get progressed.

你要讲的是艺术家和批评家互相影响，不过我觉得说批评家对艺术的创作起了规范和引导作用否则艺术家将会lost就有点不合适了。

In summary, while some people may remain unconvinced, the reasons that I have analyzed in above argument（应该是issue吧 ?)should at least make them aware of the complexities of the issue under discussion. There is no doubt that more and more people will come to realize that neither artists nor critics can beme（这个词什么意思？） of lasting value for our society. 这一段写的主观了。

something of lasting value。你没有对这个关键词作深入的探讨和定义，这是一个较大的失误。艺术家和批评家之间的关系也讨论的不太好，尤其是第三段，前面一部分有失客观，Vice verse这一句又没有论据支持，好像完全是为了一种正反两方面的逻辑严谨。

照我看，这个题目更适合一边倒的写法。你这样的中间路线反而不好。其实就像你问中说的：this issue is a complex and controversial one。这样的东西取中间路线很容易写的肤浅甚至矛盾。

你的语言文笔还是很不错的。多注意文章应该采取的逻辑结构
加油！

jxkingUID：141801

Thank you for careful and splendid comment. And I would lik to question you several question relavant.
1. as for "最后如果回到关键gives society something of lasting value就好了", when I get this issue title, I regard the focus is who (artist or critic) give the society something of great value, rather than you as said.
Because the title uses a emphasis syntax, which indicate the important part is "who". I think it like this, so I express my sentence around this focus. How do you think of it?

2. as for "这个从句我觉得多余", I wouldl remind you that this sentence is a emphasis clause, notsubordinate clause. It is a pity that readers can not find it. Or is it really something wrong with this sentence?

3.as for "讲的有些笼统了，如果能有确切的例子或是把pick up 的标准讲清楚就好了", I have used
exemplification in the first branch-argument, therefore I used a citation in this paragraph which I regard it as proper to justify there is a selection on picking up valuave art.

4. as for "未必如此吧？对于艺术，似乎从来都是艺术的原创在前，而评论家和后人的归纳总结在后", there does exist some standards for an artist to follow when he is composing a art. Take painting for example, the color of background should be coordinate and harmony with the front color, which involes the codes of color-mixing. Otherwise, the works as a whole would be regard as failure then. Who do you think?

5. as for"照我看，这个题目更适合一边倒的写法。你这样的中间路线反而不好", I thing I did choose 一边倒 in this issue, rather than 中间路线 as you think. What make us two create discrepancy is, in my analysis, that we laid the different stree on this issue. You have you focus that -----"something of lasting value", while I insist "who". And this is where there rub is. Do you agree my analysis? And so you agree my focus?

Thank you again for evaluation. You must spent more time and energy to modify my essay. I benefit badly and have confidence to make progress with your help.

木耳UID：123036

1 我不认为重点是who可以成为不对something of lasting value作解释的原因。究竟是谁给于了社会永久的价值--姑且这么翻译吧。我觉得something of lasting value的性质和内涵对你所说的主体的讨论有重要的意义。

这里的关键在于不同的主体所创造的东西是不同的。我的逻辑是首先分析这样的value是一种什么东西，具有什么性质，再由创造这种性质所需要的必不可少的条件往上推，看它的创造这到底是谁。举一个简单的例子类比一下。

一个虚拟问题:到底是哪个拿枪的年轻猎人还是那个射箭的老猎人打死了那只熊。我认为合理和可靠的分析方法是考察那只熊到底是死于子弹还是死于羽箭。如果那只熊既中了子弹又中了箭，那还要看是谁打中要害--击中心脏的箭（子弹）总比打中屁股子弹（箭）的更具有关键性作用吧？反过来，抛开熊不管，只是在那里讲老猎人经验丰富或者年轻猎人的武器先进；再或者是讲老猎人也同时会使枪...这样的讨论可以解决什么问题？

木耳UID：123036

2 开始是我疏忽了，这不是一个从句，不然按语法规则也不会有that they are。不过我的印象中强调句只是高中学过的 it is...who(that)...句型。也许还有别的方式？

3 你在第一分段讲的是有些诗人同时也兼任评论家并举了毛主席的例子予以说明。我没有看出used exemplification in the first branch-argument来证明你第二段的论点：those works of lasting value must have experienced the examination and selection by critics.

4 你讲的也是对的，艺术确实需要一定的规范。但这样的规范是前辈艺术大师创造的还是评论家创造的？我的关键意思还是那个lost有点说不过去

5 你把我的意思理解错了。关键的还是who，只不过something of lasting value的确切含义是这个讨论的必要平台。只有首先明确什么是someting of lasting value才有往下讨论的必要和意义。我的一边倒不是说只讨论who 或者说someting of lasting value,而是说对于something of lasting value而言：艺术家和评论家的作用是在是很难在短短的几百字中都说清楚的，既然如此，那还不如只谈一家。比如你觉得艺术家的作用大，那就用主要的篇幅讨论艺术家，再简略的谈谈评论家。

paisleyUID：64183

帖一段gdhdanny的意见


关于艺术家和评论家我觉得可以这样考虑。首先，艺术家通过它的作品表达个人情感世界，他们看中的更多的事self-assurance的东西，评论家的意见可以看作social-identification是一件社会品价值的另外一个方面。其次，评论家的评论有时可以决定一个艺术家的命运，这样的例子不胜枚举，可以自己搜一下。最后艺术家如果能和评论家和谐相处，必然会让丰富社会意识阶层的内涵，value的问题也就不言自明了。

ninjawangUID：174533

木耳 good critique

xin320UID：165608

木耳果然牛人