issue190 还是艺术类的：）131好难写，还在想

haiyaUID: 187989

Issue190  
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：45分0秒     546 words
从2005年1月1日19时35分到2005年1月1日20时45分
------题目------
As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—when one considers all the potential uses of such money.
------正文------
Some asserts that to allocate public resources to arts is inappropriate since there are still many social problems waiting for being solved. Admittedly, social problems such as starvation, unemployment and so forth will reduce the stability of a society. However, I still advocate allocating a part of public resources to the arts in order to the healthy and rapid development of the society.

The arguer may point out three reasons to object sponsoring the arts, especially under a condition which is abundant of social problems. Citizen's satisfaction about their life is a primary reason. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the physiology need is first demand and when this need is satisfied, human are able to pursue higher needs, such as esteem and self-actualization. Thus anyone who are hungry will not consider arts certainly. The second reason is that art is luxury. Investing on art is unwise because art only occupies the public resources and return no pay. Turning to the last reason, many artists earn money by themselves or are sponsored by individuals and companies. Consider Michelangelo and Raphael in Renaissance. They were both subsidized by a distinguished banking family, Medicis.

However, what the arguer draw to strengthen this statement exactly protest itself.

Firstly, albeit the social problems are imminent and should be regarded as the first mission, art is able to assist the government relief them. A song, which reflects the sorrow life of lowest-class in a society will move persons and arouse them to donate their money and contribute their care to the lowest-class. A movie, which records the ignored corners of a society such as the handicapped, will encourage citizens to take measure to help them as possible as they can. To some extent, the plentiful forms of art is more powerful than any bare motto and vocation to convert the wealth self-centered to others-oriented as well as alter the poor's life and relief their sufferings. On the other hand, if we subsidize art until all social problems are solved, then when will be this ideal society realized? And when shall we pay attention to the art? Once imagining a life without art, I will grue.

Secondly, it is possible for art to solve some social problem when it is converted to industry. It is not just luxury and demand lots of money in one direction. Consider Canada's film industry. It is completely sponsored by the government. Nevertheless, with the mature of film industry, more and more social problems have been solved. Many unemployed men are re-employed to participate into industry of art. Meanwhile, extra money made by film industry is applied toward education, welfare and public resources. From my part, it even paves the road for society's advancement.

Thirdly, arts need government's support especially under ill social condition. During these special periods, the sponsorship from individuals and companies is vibrant. Based on the importance of art, which are illustrated by the two points above, our government should allocate a part of social resources, which is, of course, stable and durative, to assure the creativity process of artists. If not, they will consider the existing problems other than contribute themselves into the art creativity.

To sum up, to solve social problem and to allocate public resource to art are not mutually exclusive. Actually, they are all the demand of a society. Art is not only the lubricant to diminish conflicts and collision but also the cordial to accelerate progress and development of a society.

foreverlovesUID: 166930

Some asserts that to allocate public resources to arts is inappropriate since there are still many social problems waiting for being solved. Admittedly, social problems such as starvation, unemployment and so forth will reduce the stability of a society. However, I still advocate allocating a part of public resources to the arts in order to(for) the healthy and rapid development of the society.

The arguer may point out three reasons to object sponsoring the arts, especially under a condition which is abundant(full) of social problems. Citizen's satisfaction(dissatisfaction) about their life is a primary reason. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the physiology need is first demand and when this need is satisfied, human are able to pursue higher needs, such as esteem and self-actualization. Thus anyone who are hungry will not consider arts certainly. The second reason is that art is luxury. Investing on art is unwise because art only occupies the public resources and return no pay. Turning to the last reason, many artists earn money by themselves or are sponsored by individuals and companies. Consider Michelangelo and Raphael in Renaissance. They were both subsidized by a distinguished banking family, Medicis.

However, what the arguer draw to strengthen this statement exactly protest itself.

Firstly, albeit the social problems are imminent and should be regarded as the first mission, art is able to assist the government (to)relief them. A song, which reflects the sorrow life of lowest-class in a society will move persons and arouse them to donate their money and contribute their care to the lowest-class. A movie, which records the ignored corners of a society such as the handicapped, will encourage citizens to take measure to help them as possible as they can. To some extent, the plentiful forms of art is more powerful than any bare motto and vocation to convert the wealth self-centered to others-oriented as well as alter the poor's life and relief their sufferings. On the other hand, if we subsidize art until all social problems are solved, then when will be this ideal society realized? And when shall we pay attention to the art? Once imagining a life without art, I will grue.

Secondly, it is possible for art to solve some social problem when it is converted to industry. It is not just luxury and demand lots of money in one direction. Consider Canada's film industry. It is completely sponsored by the government. Nevertheless, with the mature of film industry, more and more social problems have been solved. Many unemployed men are re-employed to participate into industry of art. Meanwhile, extra money made by film industry is applied toward education, welfare and public resources. From my part, it even paves the road for society's advancement.

Thirdly, arts need government's support especially under ill social condition. During these special periods, the sponsorship from individuals and companies is vibrant. Based on the importance of art, which are illustrated by the two points above, our government should allocate a part of social resources, which is, of course, stable and durative, to assure the creativity process of artists. If not, they will consider the existing problems other than contribute themselves into the art creativity.

To sum up, to solve social problem and to allocate public resource to art are not mutually exclusive. Actually, they are all the demand of a society. Art is not only the lubricant to diminish conflicts and collision but also the cordial to accelerate progress and development of a society.

foreverlovesUID: 166930

感觉不习惯使用那个变色工具，总是全选中，然后回到开头

觉得文章思路很清楚，但是有些语言感觉很别扭，不知道是不是用金山了

LSDUID: 157855

占座了，明天再看！

blur13_0UID: 150275

No.1 issue190 还是艺术类的：）131好难写，还在想
Issue190
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户 共用时间：45分0秒 546 words
从2005年1月1日19时35分到2005年1月1日20时45分
------题目------
As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—when one considers all the potential uses of such money.
------正文------
Some asserts that to allocate public resources to arts is inappropriate since there are still many social problems waiting for being solved. Admittedly, social problems such as starvation, unemployment and so forth will reduce the stability of a society. However, I still advocate allocating a part of public resources to the arts in order to the healthy and rapid development of the society.[别忘了说social problem与money or public resources的关系]

The arguer may point out three reasons to object sponsoring the arts, especially under a condition which is [abundant换full] of social problems. Citizen's satisfaction about their life is a primary reason. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the physiology need is first demand and when this need is satisfied, human are able to pursue higher needs, such as esteem and self-actualization. Thus anyone who are hungry will not consider arts certainly. The second reason is that art is luxury. Investing on art is unwise because art only occupies the public resources and return no pay. Turning to the last reason, many artists earn money by themselves or are sponsored by individuals and companies.[人们为什么要反对这一条呢？？？] Consider Michelangelo and Raphael in Renaissance. They were both subsidized by a distinguished banking family, Medicis.

However, what the arguer draw to strengthen this statement exactly protest itself.

Firstly, albeit the social problems are imminent and should be regarded as the first mission, art is able to assist the government relief them. A song, which reflects the sorrow life of lowest-class in a society will move persons and arouse them to donate their money and contribute their care to the lowest-class. A movie, which records the ignored corners of a society such as the handicapped, will [encourage恰当吗] citizens to take measure to help them as possible as they can. [To some extent, the plentiful forms of art is more powerful than any bare motto and vocation to convert the wealth self-centered to others-oriented as well as alter the poor's life and relief their sufferings. On the other hand, if we subsidize art until all social problems are solved, then when will be this ideal society realized? And when shall we pay attention to the art? Once imagining a life without art, I will grue.[例子可以再具体，比如希望工程的宣传歌可以发动公众募捐，水灾的摄影展可以。。。公益性的艺术]

Secondly, it is possible for art to solve some social problem when it is converted to industry. It is not just luxury and demand lots of money in one direction. Consider Canada's film industry. It is completely sponsored by the government. Nevertheless, with the mature of film industry, more and more social problems have been solved. Many unemployed men are re-employed to participate into industry of art. [具体说做什么工作？到底提供了哪些就业机会呢？？]Meanwhile, extra money made by film industry is applied toward education, welfare and public resources. From my part, it even paves the road for society's advancement.[例子很好！！还不够细。。。产业化的艺术]

Thirdly, arts need government's support especially under ill social condition. During these special periods, the sponsorship from individuals and companies is vibrant. Based on the importance of art, which are illustrated by the two points above, our government should allocate a part of social resources, which is, of course, stable and durative, to assure the creativity process of artists. If not, they will consider the existing problems other than contribute themselves into the art creativity.[有点乱，不是应该呼应第二段里的第三条吗？感觉没怎么说就是循环论证了，还是不具体。可以具体举个非常时期，说对艺术家的资助是必要的]

To sum up, to solve social problem and to allocate public resource to art are not mutually exclusive. Actually, they are all the demand of a society. Art is not only the lubricant to [diminish conflicts and collision概括的不准] but also the cordial to accelerate progress and development of a society.
[总评：写得很好，羡慕。但注意all the potential uses of such money不等于只有social problem，b3一般，不如集中精力写b1b2。个人见解，供参考 ;) ]  欢迎也来拍拍我的argu，谢谢

blur13_0UID: 150275

No.5 我来拍，呵呵
No.1 issue190 还是艺术类的：）131好难写，还在想
Issue190
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户 共用时间：45分0秒 546 words
从2005年1月1日19时35分到2005年1月1日20时45分
------题目------
As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—when one considers all the potential uses of such money.
------正文------
Some asserts that to allocate public resources to arts is inappropriate since there are still many social problems waiting for being solved. Admittedly, social problems such as starvation, unemployment and so forth will reduce the stability of a society. However, I still advocate allocating a part of public resources to the arts in order to the healthy and rapid development of the society.别忘了说social problem与money or public resources的关系

The arguer may point out three reasons to object sponsoring the arts, especially under a condition which is abundant换full of social problems. Citizen's satisfaction about their life is a primary reason. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the physiology need is first demand and when this need is satisfied, human are able to pursue higher needs, such as esteem and self-actualization. Thus anyone who are hungry will not consider arts certainly. The second reason is that art is luxury. Investing on art is unwise because art only occupies the public resources and return no pay. Turning to the last reason, many artists earn money by themselves or are sponsored by individuals and companies.人们为什么要反对这一条呢？？？ Consider Michelangelo and Raphael in Renaissance. They were both subsidized by a distinguished banking family, Medicis.

However, what the arguer draw to strengthen this statement exactly protest itself.

Firstly, albeit the social problems are imminent and should be regarded as the first mission, art is able to assist the government relief them. A song, which reflects the sorrow life of lowest-class in a society will move persons and arouse them to donate their money and contribute their care to the lowest-class. A movie, which records the ignored corners of a society such as the handicapped, will encourage恰当吗 citizens to take measure to help them as possible as they can. To some extent, the plentiful forms of art is more powerful than any bare motto and vocation to convert the wealth self-centered to others-oriented as well as alter the poor's life and relief their sufferings. On the other hand, if we subsidize art until all social problems are solved, then when will be this ideal society realized? And when shall we pay attention to the art? Once imagining a life without art, I will grue.例子可以再具体，比如希望工程的宣传歌可以发动公众募捐，水灾的摄影展可以。。。公益性的艺术

Secondly, it is possible for art to solve some social problem when it is converted to industry. It is not just luxury and demand lots of money in one direction. Consider Canada's film industry. It is completely sponsored by the government. Nevertheless, with the mature of film industry, more and more social problems have been solved. Many unemployed men are re-employed to participate into industry of art. 具体说做什么工作？到底提供了哪些就业机会呢？？Meanwhile, extra money made by film industry is applied toward education, welfare and public resources. From my part, it even paves the road for society's advancement.例子很好！！还不够细。。。产业化的艺术

Thirdly, arts need government's support especially under ill social condition. During these special periods, the sponsorship from individuals and companies is vibrant. Based on the importance of art, which are illustrated by the two points above, our government should allocate a part of social resources, which is, of course, stable and durative, to assure the creativity process of artists. If not, they will consider the existing problems other than contribute themselves into the art creativity.有点乱，不是应该呼应第二段里的第三条吗？感觉没怎么说就是循环论证了，还是不具体。可以具体举个非常时期，说对艺术家的资助是必要的

To sum up, to solve social problem and to allocate public resource to art are not mutually exclusive. Actually, they are all the demand of a society. Art is not only the lubricant to diminish conflicts and collision概括的不准 but also the cordial to accelerate progress and development of a society.
总评：写得很好，羡慕。但注意all the potential uses of such money不等于只有social problem，b3一般，不如集中精力写b1b2。个人见解，供参考  ;)   欢迎也来拍拍我的argu，谢谢

指向大海UID: 158737

Some asserts that to allocate public resources to arts is inappropriate since there are still many social problems waiting for being solved. Admittedly, social problems such as starvation, unemployment and so forth will reduce the stability of a society. However, I still advocate allocating a part of public resources to the arts in order to the healthy and rapid development of the society.

The arguer may point out three reasons to object sponsoring the arts, especially under a condition which is abundant of social problems. Citizen's satisfaction about their life is a primary reason. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the physiology need is first demand and when this need is satisfied, human are able to pursue higher needs, such as esteem and self-actualization. Thus anyone who are hungry will not consider arts certainly. The second reason is that art is luxury. Investing on art is unwise because art only occupies the public resources and return no pay. Turning to the last reason, many artists earn money by themselves or are sponsored by individuals and companies. Consider Michelangelo and Raphael 这里向你请教了,这是哪个大艺术家?偶翻译过来不认识啊! in Renaissance. They were both subsidized by a distinguished banking family, Medicis.

However, what the arguer draw to strengthen this statement exactly protest itself.

Firstly, albeit the social problems are imminent and should be regarded as the first mission, art is able to assist the government color=blueto /colorrelief them. A song, which reflects the sorrow life of lowest-class in a society will move persons and arouse them to donate their money and contribute their care to the lowest-class. A movie, which records the ignored corners of a society such as the handicapped, will encourage citizens to take measure to help them as possible as they can. 是否可以举具体的例子呢?比方blowing in the wind和摩登时代?To some extent, the plentiful forms of art is more powerful than any bare motto and vocation to convert the wealth self-centered to others-oriented as well as alter the poor's life and relief their sufferings. On the other hand, if we subsidize art until all social problems are solved, then when will be this ideal society realized? And when shall we pay attention to the art? Once imagining a life without art, I will grue.

Secondly, it is possible for art to solve some social problem when it is converted to industry. It is not just luxury and demand lots of money in one direction. Consider Canada's film industry. It is completely sponsored by the government. Nevertheless, with the mature of film industry, more and more social problems have been solved. Many unemployed men are re-employed to participate into color=bluethe /colorindustry of art. Meanwhile, extra money made by film industry is applied toward education, welfare and public resources. From my part, it even paves the road for society's advancement.

Thirdly, arts need government's support especially under ill 总感觉ill怪怪的,也不知道用哪个词替换好social condition. During these special periods, the sponsorship from individuals and companies is vibrant. Based on the importance of art, which are illustrated by the two points above, our government should allocate a part of social resources, which is, of course, stable and durative, to assure the creativity process of artists. If not, they will consider the existing problems other than contribute themselves into the art creativity.

To sum up, to solve social problem and to allocate public resource to art are not mutually exclusive. Actually, they are all the demand of a society. Art is not only the lubricant to diminish conflicts and collision but also the cordial to accelerate progress and development of a society. 要我就写make greater progress to the society


首先我说我是支持这个观点的,故看你的文章就更挑剔,我觉得实例少了,而且艺术就是歌和电影么?比方豪华建筑物和一些旅游景点的过度建设什么的,你应该更有力的反驳.  总体上很好,偶要是限时也写能想到这么多就好了

haiyaUID: 187989

Raphael
拉斐尔，意大利画家，建筑学家
文艺复兴时期与米开朗基罗和达芬奇齐名，好象是这三个人：）