issue144 同主题写作 自我感觉非常烂

so猫UID: 148633

Issue144
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：45分2秒     597 words
从2005年2月14日9时37分到2005年2月14日10时45分
------题目------
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.
------正文------
It is well known that artists create works, while critics comment on works. Based on their difference in function, I fundamentally agree with the speaker that the "lasting" value was given by artist rather than critics, although critics, to certain extent, make values as well.

First of all, there lies a puzzling question to distinguish the lasting value from the common one. As far as I am concerned, what the artists contribute to society-- their works-- is established at the moment they are created. In other words, the artistic value of a specific piece of works are defined and remained alternative since it was accomplished. For example, the artistic value of the novel "The Great Expectations" lies in the pages of the books which cannot be changed due to the comments from critics and the ethical aspects of the public. Also we can turn to look at the Spielberg's films, Beethoven's music, and Van Gogh's paintings; they are all experiencing both praises and criticism in different eras by different critics. However, their lasting value remained silently and waited patiently to be discovered when they were born. Thus their critical value is created by the artist themselves rather than the outside condition.

Compared with the artists, the critics are more likely to trap themselves into specific social condition and personal experience in which most of the value they make proves to be meteoric eventually. Lacking of the consistency of minds of a specific artist, the critics are easily make himself into the opposite side of other critics. Due to the difference lying in personal experience and characteristics, as well as the aspects to examine the artistic works and the knowledge they are equipped, their criticism have obvious limitation. For supporting example, one needs to look no further than the historical documentaries on the variable comments and analysis on Hamlet, one of the most famous characteristics in Shakespeare's works. Almost the criticisms, no matter how they are organized and written, are sleeping quietly in the museum and library rather than wide spreading in the modern society. People nowadays, tend to buy the original book to read and establish their "Hamlet" on own rather than listening to a teacher saying what is right or wrong. From this point of view, the critics, although they sweat on making values through analysis of the artistic works, contribute little thing that could last long for the whole society.

Admittedly, there exist few critics who regard their criticism as a new works rather than merely the copy of the original one thus to generate creative things that will last long. For instance, Qian Zhongshu, a very famous critic on traditional Chinese poetry, has published a book to analyze and comment on the poems in Song Dynasty. At first people mistook the book for an ordinary criticism book; however, after reading thoroughly, people realized that quantity of involvement of personal experience and feelings overwhelm the purely analysis and boring criticism. The book itself is not critical things, but a new works to express his feelings and opinions. Therefore, it is not difficult to conclude that the biases on all critics are unfair since they could create new things on the basis of the original ones thus make lasting value to society.

To sum up, it is the artist who makes lasting value to society, while critic helps people to understand them better. The function of artists and critics are distinguished obviously; however, the critics, if used their talents into the process of express themselves instead of pure analysis, could make value to be permanently.

实际上只写了40分钟
最后5分钟用来改了两个小地方
贴到word里还是发现错误一堆
再回头看又觉得毛病也不少了~

唉~

comingsoonUID: 175137

先占一个，再看看。
觉得你的速度好快，我要是有你那样就笑欢了。

comingsoonUID: 175137

It is well known that artists create works, while critics comment on works. Based on their difference in function, I fundamentally agree with the speaker that the "lasting" value was given by artist rather than critics, although critics, to certain extent, make values as well.

First of all, there lies a puzzling question to distinguish the lasting value from the common one. As far as I am concerned, what the artists contribute to society-- their works-- is established at the moment they are created 这句话没太弄懂是什么意思 . In other words, the artistic value of a specific piece of works are defined and remained alternative since it was accomplished. For example, the artistic value of the novel "The Great Expectations" lies in the pages of the books which cannot be changed due to 感觉前后没有什么因果关系，为什么用due to? the comments from critics and the ethical aspects of the public. Also we can turn to look at the Spielberg's films, Beethoven's music, and Van Gogh's paintings; they are all experiencing both praises and criticism in different eras by different critics. However, their lasting value remained silently and waited patiently to be discovered when they were born. Thus their critical value is created by the artist themselves rather than the outside condition.
开头那句怎么区分持久的价值和普通的价值好像在后面并没有回应，而且什么是持久的价值和为什么是持久的好像也没有很好的表达出来

Compared with the artists, the critics are more likely to trap themselves into specific social condition and personal experience in which most of the value they make proves to be meteoric eventually. Lacking of the consistency of minds of a specific artist, the critics are easily make himself themselves into the opposite side of other critics 因为缺乏对作者的必要的持续的认识，就会做出与其他critics不同的决定？ . Due to the difference lying in personal experience and characteristics, as well as the aspects to examine the artistic works and the knowledge they are equipped, their criticism have obvious limitation. For supporting example, one needs to look no further than the historical documentaries on the variable comments and analysis on Hamlet, one of the most famous characteristics in Shakespeare's works. Almost the criticisms, no matter how they are organized and written, are sleeping quietly in the museum and library rather than wide spreading in the modern society. People nowadays, tend to buy the original book to read and establish their "Hamlet" on own rather than listening to a teacher saying what is right or wrong 这个例子只是说people,好像和critics没什么关系噢 . From this point of view, the critics, although they sweat on making values through analysis of the artistic works, contribute little thing 不要thing that could last long for the whole society.

Admittedly, there exist a few critics who regard their criticism as a new works rather than merely the copy of the original one thus to generate creative things that will last long. For instance, Qian Zhongshu, a very famous critic on traditional Chinese poetry, has published a book to analyze and comment on the poems in Song Dynasty. At first people mistook the book for an ordinary criticism book; however, after reading thoroughly, people realized that quantity of involvement of personal experience and feelings overwhelm the purely analysis and boring criticism. The book itself is not critical things is not a critical thing , but a new works to express his feelings and opinions. Therefore, it is not difficult to conclude that the biases on all critics are unfair since they could create new things on the basis of the original ones thus make lasting value to society.

To sum up, it is the artist who makes lasting value to society, while critic helps people to understand them better. The function of artists and critics are distinguished obviously; however, the critics, if used using??? their talents into the process of expressing themselves instead of pure analysis, could make value to be permanently.

论证的结构还比较清晰，感觉就是b1没有太说清楚，个人意见。

dream a dreamUID: 198106

我10个小时后来看你的作文可好？
如果你有空，也请你看看我的同主题写作。
谢谢
https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=255272

flyingwindUID: 189320

这个题目比较难写哦

It is well known that artists create works, while critics comment on works.这个开头我比较喜欢 Based on their difference in function, I fundamentally agree with the speaker that the "lasting" value was given by artist rather than critics, although critics, to certain extent, make values as well.

First of all, there lies a puzzling question to distinguish the lasting value from the common oneone?社么意思. 楼上“comingsoon”同学也提到了；开头那句怎么区分持久的价值和普通的价值好像在后面并没有回应，而且什么是持久的价值和为什么是持久的好像也没有很好的表达出来，实际上这句子可以完全去掉，虽然有斑竹建议这个地方最好作个区分，但是1。不容易。2。多篇幅。3。冲淡主题。完全可以避开不谈。抓住重点展开，开始看到这句子就以为你要整个一段来区分，幸好后面又回来了，不然这多的一段很累赘As far as I am concerned, what the artists contribute to society-- their works-- is-》has been established at the moment they are created. In other words, the artistic value of a specific piece of works are defined and remained alternative这个adj用错了吧？ since it was accomplished. For example, the artistic value of the novel "The Great Expectations" lies in the pages of the books which cannot be changed due to不该是归因于..该是随着..把 the comments from critics and the ethical aspects of the public. 这句不太通顺Also we can turn to look at the Spielberg's films, Beethoven's music, and Van Gogh's paintings; they are all experiencing both praises and criticism in different eras by different critics. However, their lasting value remained silently and waited patiently to be discovered when ？since？they were born. Thus their critical value is created by the artists themselves rather than the outside condition.

Compared with the artists, the critics are more likely to trap？？ themselves into specific social condition and personal experience in which most of the value they make proves to be meteoric eventually. Lacking of the consistency of minds of a specific artist你是想说各个人思想不一致把？还是一个critic自己的思想老是打架？那有点奇怪哦, the critics are easily make himself into the opposite side of other critics. Due to the difference lying in personal experience and characteristics, as well as the aspects to examine the artistic works and the knowledge they are equipped, their criticism have obvious limitation. For supporting example, one needs to 去掉look no further than the historical documentaries on the variable comments and analysis on Hamlet这个例子还是比较适合的，就是太长了，冲淡了说理。要不干脆缩短一半hamlet，再举个例子。, one of the most famous characteristics in Shakespeare's works. Almost the criticisms, no matter howwell they are organized and written, are sleeping quietly in the museum and library rather than wide spreading in the modern society. People nowadays, tend to buy the original book to read and establish their "Hamlet" on own 社么意思rather than listening to a teacherteacher？没说到critics？ saying what is right or wrong. From this point of view, the critics, although they sweat on making values through analysis of the artistic works, contribute little thing that could last long for the whole society. 另一个可能引起错误的你没说到，你说的是“不能”，能力有限制，看法局限，没办法；还有一个是“不愿意”，和利益有关

Admittedly, there exist few用这个就“没有”了 critics who regard their criticism as a new works rather than merely the copy of the original one thus to generate creative things that will last long. For instance, Qian Zhongshu, a very famous critic on traditional Chinese poetry, has published a book to analyze and comment on the poems in Song Dynasty. At first people mistook the book for an ordinary criticism book; however, after reading thoroughly, people realized that quantity of involvement of personal experience and feelings overwhelm the purely analysis and boring criticism. The book itself is not critical things??复数？, but a new works to express his feelings and opinions. Therefore, it is not difficult to conclude that the biases on all critics are unfair since they could create new things on the basis of the original ones thus make lasting value to society.

To sum up, it is the artist who makes lasting value to society, while critic helps people to understand them better. The function of artists and critics are distinguished obviously; however, the critics, if used their talents into the process of express ？？themselves instead of pure analysis, could make value to be permanently.permanent to society

我也写了个，有时间可以帮我看看吗？见我的签名档

davidjackyUID: 135962

It is well known that artists create works, while critics comment on works. Based on theirdifference in function their very different roles , I fundamentally agree with the speaker that the "lasting" value was given by artists rather than critics, although critics, to certain extent, make values as wellmay as well .

First of all, there lies a puzzling question to distinguish the lasting value from the common one. As far as I am concerned, what the artists contribute to society-- their works-- is established at the moment when they are created. In other words, the artistic value of a specific piece of works are defined and remained alternative since it was accomplished. For example, the artistic value of the novel "The Great Expectations" lies in the pages of the books which cannot be changed due to the comments from critics and the ethical aspects of the public. Also we can turn to look atturn to就不要look at，客观的说，你这个地方只是表面的强调优秀艺术作品的内在价值，但是并没有告诉读者如何有价值，如果改成“尽管有很多的批评家在带着苛刻的眼光去审视S的电影、B的音乐、VG的画，但是S电影的震撼、B音乐的伟大、VG画丰富的内涵仍然感引导着我们去挖掘和欣赏这样的艺术魅力”，措辞不一定准确，但是我想能简单说下这些艺术的具体价值会好些，不知你再回来看这篇文章的时候，是否有同感？ the Spielberg's films, Beethoven's music, and Van Gogh's paintings; they are all experiencing both praises and criticism in different eras by different critics. However, their lasting value remained silently and waited patiently to be discovered when they were born. Thus their critical value is created by the artist themselves rather than the outside condition.本段论述作品本身的内在价值，优秀的作品一经产生就具有优秀的价值

Compared with the artists, the critics are more likely to trap themselves into specific social condition and personal experience in which most of the value they make proves to be meteoric eventually. Lacking of the consistency of minds of a specific artist, the critics are easily make himself into the opposite side of other critics. Due to the difference lying in personal experience and characteristics, as well as the aspects to examine the artistic works and the knowledge they are equipped, their criticism have obvious limitation. For supporting example, one needs to look no further than the historical documentaries on the variable comments and analysis on Hamlet, one of the most famous characteristics in Shakespeare's works. Almost the criticisms, no matter how they are organized and written, are sleeping quietly in the museum and library rather than wide spreading in the modern society. People nowadays, tend to buy the original book to read and establish their "Hamlet" on own rather than listening to a teacher saying what is right or wrong. From this point of view, the critics, although they sweat on making values through analysis of the artistic works, contribute little thing that could last long for the whole society. 这段似乎有些问题，开头有了很重的笔墨描写批评家的价值是meteoric和obvious limitation，但是后面的例子是说people对works的态度，并没有将critics和works结合，你这段可以说人们越来越不关心c的态度，只是用自己的mind来判断作品的好坏

Admittedly, there exist few critics who regard their criticism as a new works rather than merely the copy of the original one thus to generate creative things that will last long. For instance, Qian Zhongshu, a very famous critic on traditional Chinese poetry, has published a book to analyze and comment on the poems in Song Dynasty. At first people mistook the book for an ordinary criticism book; however, after reading thoroughly, people realized that quantity of involvement of personal experience and feelings overwhelm the purely analysis and boring criticism. The book itself is not critical things, but a new works to express his feelings and opinions. Therefore, it is not difficult to conclude that the biases on all critics are unfair since they could create new things on the basis of the original ones thus make lasting value to society. 这段可以

To sum up, it is the artist who makes lasting value to society, while critic helps people to understand them better. The function of artists and critics are distinguished obviously; however, the critics, if used their talents into the process of express themselves instead of pure analysis, could make value to be permanently.

so猫UID: 148633

谢谢 每次都能得到各位斑斑的砖头
偶考完了一定来看~~~

这篇文章在我写的时候觉得论证有非常大的问题
但是没办法写都写了 其实跟提纲一点都不一样但是只能撑下去了~~~

我再考虑考虑里面的问题~~~
再次谢谢

楼上的各位 非常感谢你们的帮助
但是我现在实在没有时间
能等我考完了吗

考完了我一定回坛子帮忙 虽然本人也很菜~

dream a dreamUID: 198106

It is well known that artists create works, while critics comment on works. Based on their difference in function, I fundamentally agree with the speaker that the "lasting" value was given by artist rather than critics, although critics, to certain extent, make values as well.

First of all, there lies a puzzling question to distinguish the lasting value from the common one. As far as I am concerned, what the artists contribute to society-- their works-- is established at the moment they are created. In other words, the artistic value of a specific piece of works are defined and remained alternative since it was accomplished. For example, the artistic value of the novel "The Great Expectations" lies in the pages of the books which cannot be changed due to the comments from critics and the ethical aspects of the public. Also we can turn to look at the Spielberg's films, Beethoven's music, and Van Gogh's paintings; they are all experiencing both praises and criticism in different eras by different critics. However, their lasting value remained silently and waited patiently to be discovered when they were born. Thus their critical value is created by the artist themselves rather than the outside condition.

[In this paragraph you ponit out the difference between common value and the lasting value, but you did not interpret further. So I think maybe you'd better avoid to point it out.]

Compared with the artists, the critics are more likely to trap themselves into specific social condition and personal experience in which most of the value they make proves to be meteoric eventually. Lacking of the consistency of minds of a specific artist, the critics are easily make himself into the opposite side of other critics. Due to the difference lying in personal experience and characteristics, as well as the aspects to examine the artistic works and the knowledge they are equipped, their criticism have obvious limitation. For supporting example, one needs to look no further than the historical documentaries on the variable comments and analysis on Hamlet, one of the most famous characteristics in Shakespeare's works. Almost the criticisms, no matter how they are organized and written, are sleeping quietly in the museum and library rather than wide spreading in the modern society. People nowadays, tend to buy the original book to read and establish their "Hamlet" on own rather than listening to a teacher saying what is right or wrong. From this point of view, the critics, although they sweat on making values through analysis of the artistic works, contribute little thing that could last long for the whole society.

Admittedly, there exist few critics who regard their criticism as a new works rather than merely the copy of the original one thus to generate creative things that will last long. For instance,

[Is this sentense negative? If it is negative , I think it is not suitable.]

Qian Zhongshu, a very famous critic on traditional Chinese poetry, has published a book to analyze and comment on the poems in Song Dynasty. At first people mistook the book for an ordinary criticism book; however, after reading thoroughly, people realized that quantity of involvement of personal experience and feelings overwhelm the purely analysis and boring criticism.

[The last sentense has grammar mistake.]

The book itself is not critical things, [grammar mistake]

but a new works to express his feelings and opinions. Therefore, it is not difficult to conclude that the biases on all critics are unfair since they could create new things on the basis of the original ones thus make lasting value to society.

To sum up, it is the artist who makes lasting value to society, while critic helps people to understand them better. The function of artists and critics are distinguished obviously; however, the critics, if used their talents into the process of express themselves instead of pure analysis, could make value to be permanently.



I think your logic is not bad, but you made some grammar mistakes and you cannot express your idea very clear in some sentense so that they confused readers.