ISSUE144 同主题写作，老规矩，有改必回！

sblbaslerUID: 175229

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.

The past decades witnessed a trend that the critic plays an increasingly essential role in the process of evaluating the value of art: it is the critic who gives the society something of lasting value. Just logical, this argument may be, I, however, advocate that it is possible that the critic may give the society something of value, but it is something of the lasting value that is given to the society by the artist.

There is no denying and as the history witnessed that the critics did give the society something of the value of art, which, however, hardly can be seen as lasting. The simple reason is that one cannot rule out the possibility that the critic "works" for the artist: in the era of admiring wealth leading to the promotion of some critic’s attention on the interest of himself but not the value of art, some scandals about art arouse------that some work of art is of great value yesterday but of great dreg today had indeed happened in our reality. Another reason is that granted the critic is honest, one cannot guarantee that he or she is not confined by the society one lives in------ even though the critic makes the alleged right decision today, one cannot conclude that it is right for ever, or even tomorrow. Therefore, critic cannot give the society the lasting value of art, for critic, but not the lasting value, is restricted by the time, .

The truly lasting value of art is engendered in the very inception of the work by the artist. As far as one concerns, the truly lasting value of art shows the beauty to the majority of people rather than the other artists; the truly lasting value of art forces the vast amount of people to feel the art by heart rather than let them understand it by the knowledge that the critics teach them. Anyone will generate a kind of awe to the god when he or she stands in front of Sphinx and looks at her alleged smile, whether he or she really knows the answer of her riddle or not; Anyone will feel a kind of heartquake towards life and when he or she listens to Beethoven's symphony, whether he or she has learned the basic knowledge of music or not; Anyone will burst out a kind of piety when he or she walks along the chapel in the Vatican whether he or she appreciates the Sistine chapel fresco , whether he or she has been taught by Michelangelo or not; Anyone will arouse a kind of evaluating of beauty when he or she has watched the Venus and the mystery smile of Mona Lisa, whether he or she has ever been a critic or not. The reason that anyone can understand those pedestrian but profound works is not thanks to the critics but because of the core of the lasting value itself. For those works of art which have lasting value do not need any critics to evaluate, therefore the belief that it is the critic who gives the society the lasting value of art is unwarranted.

On the other hand, one cannot lose sight of the facts that during the human history, there did exist the “accident” that the value, at least until today it is a kind of lasting value, of the art should thank the critic by whose evaluating it deserves its value. Van Gough’s work is an exact case in point. One cannot say that Van Gough’s work will not be as famous as today but for the help of the critic but one can say that at least not that fast.

To sum up, since the lasting value of art can be toughed by most of us, the critics seem not to deserve such a reputation that it is they who give the lasting value of art to the society. However, the society cannot go without them, for there, indeed, are some of works of art that have lasting value but common people cannot understand.

基本上算限时写的，差不多没超时（因为赶着要出去），总觉得这篇文章第1段有点问题，光是说理了，没有确实的例子（实在想不起来），大家看看给出出注意！

sblbaslerUID: 175229

有事急着要出去，没怎么检查，等回来检查吧！大家先帮我看看吧！谢过了！必回拍！

davidjackyUID: 135962

最初由 sblbasler 发布
[B]有事急着要出去，没怎么检查，等回来检查吧！大家先帮我看看吧！谢过了！必回拍！ [/B]

观点很好，但是还是等你检查了再看，再急也要顾及一下大家的感受，尽管你还是很老实的ID，你自己先看看，再PM给我，好吧？

sblbaslerUID: 175229

版主，改完了！顺便弱弱地问一句，PM是什么意思！

Mars3000UID: 198477

The past decades witnessed a trend that the critic plays an increasingly essential role in the process of evaluating the value of art: it is the critic who gives the society something of lasting value. Just logical, this argument may be, I, however, advocate that it is possible that the critic may give the society something of value, but itit指代什么 is something of the lasting value that is given to the society by the artist.

There is no denying and as the history witnessed that the critics did give the society something of the value of art, which, however, hardly can be seen as lasting. The simple reason is that one cannot rule out the possibility that the critic "works" for the artist: in the era of admiring wealth leading to the promotion of some critic’s attention on the interest of himself but not the value of art, some scandals about art arouse------that some work of art is of great value yesterday but of great dreg today had indeed happened in our reality. Another reason is that granted the critic is honest, one cannot guarantee that he or she is not confined by the society one lives in------ even though the critic makes the alleged right decision today, one cannot conclude that it is应改为would be right for ever, or even tomorrow. Therefore, critic cannot give the society the lasting value of art, for critic, but not the lasting value, is restricted by the time, .这里是否可以理解为艺术家创造的价值是客观存在的，而评论家所揭示的价值由于不同的尺度是变化的，因此这一价值只能体现为阶段性的，而非永恒的。这是一个比较新的提法。

The truly lasting value of art is engendered in the very inception of the work by the artist. As far as one concerns, the truly lasting value of art shows the beauty to the majority of people rather than the other artists; the truly lasting value of art forces the vast amount of people to feel the art by heart rather than let them understand it by the knowledge that the critics teach them. Anyone will generate a kind of awe to the god when he or she stands in front of Sphinx and looks at her alleged smile, whether he or she really knows the answer of her riddle or not; Anyone will feel a kind of heartquake towards life and when he or she listens to Beethoven's symphony, whether he or she has learned the basic knowledge of music or not; Anyone will burst out a kind of piety when he or she walks along the chapel in the Vatican whether he or she appreciates the Sistine chapel fresco , whether he or she has been taught by Michelangelo or not; Anyone will arouse a kind of evaluating of beauty when he or she has watched the Venus and the mystery smile of Mona Lisa, whether he or she has ever been a critic or not. The reason that anyone can understand those pedestrian but profound works is not thanks to the critics but because of the core of the lasting value itself. For those works of art which have lasting value do not need any critics to evaluate, therefore the belief that it is the critic who gives the society the lasting value of art is unwarranted.例子举的非常不错；不过四个这么长的排比行不行啊，就怕老外一口气上不来。

On the other hand, one cannot lose sight of the facts that during the human history, there did exist the “accident” that the value, at least until today it is应改为being a kind of lasting value, of the art should thank the critic by whose evaluating是否应为evaluation it deserves its value. Van Gough’s work is an exact case in point. One cannot say that Van Gough’s work will not be as famous as today but forwithout好些，因为后面又出现but the help of the critic but one can say that at least not that fast.

To sum up, since the lasting value of art can be toughed by most of us, the critics seem not to deserve such a reputation that it is they who give the lasting value of art to the society. However, the society cannot go without them, for there, indeed, are some of works of art that have lasting value but common people cannot understand.

限时写成这样很牛，佩服！

sblbaslerUID: 175229

谢谢你的修改，我这个限时是提前想好思路的，有水分。

sblbaslerUID: 175229

TO：Mars3000
It is ... that 我用的是强调句，强调是lasting value 而不是一般的value

Mars3000UID: 198477

[B]也许评论家能提供某种价值，但艺术家创造的确是永恒的价值。[/B]
经你提示，这样理解就想通了。

chenh1207UID: 182826

sblbasler
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.

The past decades witnessed a trend that the critic plays an increasingly essential role in the process of evaluating the value of art: it is the critic who gives the society something of lasting value. Just logical, this argument may be, I, however, advocate that it is possible that the critic may give the society something of value, but it is something of the lasting value that is given to the society by the artist.
你的二分法破题，给我启发：我的思路是artists have lasting values, but critics not;而你的思路是artists have lasting values, whereas critics only have values not lasting.你关于critics 的看法不仅是not lasting value，而且还提出自己的看法有一定的value
There is no denying and as the history witnessed that the critics did give the society something of the value of art, which, however, hardly can be seen as lasting. The simple reason is that one cannot rule out the possibility that the critic "works" for the artist: in the era of admiring wealth leading to the promotion of some critic’s attention on the interest of himself but not the value of art, some scandals about art arouse------that some work of art is of great value yesterday but of great dreg today had indeed happened in our reality. Another reason is that granted the critic is honest, one cannot guarantee that he or she is not confined by the society one lives in------ even though the critic makes the alleged right decision today, one cannot conclude that it is right for ever, or even tomorrow. Therefore, critic cannot give the society the lasting value of art, for critic, but not the lasting value, is restricted by the time, .这段照应了开头

The truly lasting value of art is engendered in the very inception of the work by the artist. As far as one concerns, the truly lasting value of art shows the beauty to the majority of people rather than the other artists; the truly lasting value of art forces the vast amount of people to feel the art by heart rather than let them understand it by the knowledge that the critics teach them. Anyone will generate a kind of awe to the god when he or she stands in front of Sphinx and looks at her alleged smile, whether he or she really knows the answer of her riddle or not; Anyone will feel a kind of heartquake towards life and when he or she listens to Beethoven's symphony, whether he or she has learned the basic knowledge of music or not; Anyone will burst out a kind of piety when he or she walks along the chapel in the Vatican whether he or she appreciates the Sistine chapel fresco , whether he or she has been taught by Michelangelo or not; Anyone will arouse a kind of evaluating of beauty when he or she has watched the Venus and the mystery smile of Mona Lisa, whether he or she has ever been a critic or not. The reason that anyone can understand those pedestrian but profound works is not thanks to the critics but because of the core of the lasting value itself. For those works of art which have lasting value do not need any critics to evaluate, therefore the belief that it is the critic who gives the society the lasting value of art is unwarranted.文笔很好，但这些例子的lasting的地方何在，请指出

On the other hand, one cannot lose sight of the facts that during the human history, there did exist the “accident” that the value, at least until today it is a kind of lasting value, of the art should thank the critic by whose evaluating it deserves its value. Van Gough’s work is an exact case in point. One cannot say that Van Gough’s work will not be as famous as today but for the help of the critic but one can say that at least not that fast.这个例子我觉的有点问题，题目是谁给了lasting value,而这个例子只是说是critics discover values，而van gogh 的lasting value不是他们给出的，而是原本就存在的呀

To sum up, since the lasting value of art can be toughed by most of us, the critics seem not to deserve such a reputation that it is they who give the lasting value of art to the society. However, the society cannot go without them, for there, indeed, are some of works of art that have lasting value but common people cannot understand.结尾的观点不太清楚呀，我个人觉得结尾是不应该在让步了

希望大家一起讨论，共同进步！

davidjackyUID: 135962

The past decades witnessed a trend that the critic plays an increasingly essential role in the process of evaluating the value of art: it is the critic who gives the society something of lasting value. Just logical, this argument may be,

There is no denying and as the history witnessed that the critics did give the society something of the value of art, which, however, hardly can be seen as lasting[value]. The simple reason is that one cannot rule out the possibility that the critic "works" for the artist: in the era of admiring wealth leading to the promotion of some critic’s attention on the interest of himself but not the value of art, some scandals about art arouse------that some work of art is of great value yesterday but of great dreg today had indeed happened in our reality. Another reason is that granted the critic is honest, one cannot guarantee that he or she is not confined by the society one lives in------ even though the critic makes the alleged right decision today, one cannot conclude that it is right for ever, or even tomorrow. Therefore, critic cannot give the society the lasting value of art, for critic, but not the lasting value, is restricted by the time, .文中两个原因说C不能传造Lasting value，其实我觉得你这里说的不一定就是价值，甚至不是价值，就是C的个人评判而已。改进的意见就是直接说C为了自己的利益或者眼光使得无价值可言，直接论述

The truly[这里用truly你的心态无非是认为B1写的是“faked”or false value,进一步说明你对lasting这个词的把握，我认为lasting的value是positive的，也只有真正有value的东西才会lasting] lasting value of art is engendered in the very inception of the work by the artist. As far as one concerns, the truly lasting value of art shows the beauty to the majority of people rather than the other artists; the truly lasting value of art forces the vast amount of people to feel the art by heart rather than let them understand it by the knowledge that the critics teach them. Anyone will generate a kind of awe to the god when he or she stands in front of Sphinx and looks at her alleged smile, whether he or she really knows the answer of her riddle or not; Anyone will feel a kind of heartquake towards life and when he or she listens to Beethoven's symphony, whether he or she has learned the basic knowledge of music or not; Anyone will burst out a kind of piety when he or she walks along the chapel in the Vatican whether he or she appreciates the Sistine chapel fresco , whether he or she has been taught by Michelangelo or not; Anyone will arouse a kind of evaluating of beauty when he or she has watched the Venus and the mystery smile of Mona Lisa, whether he or she has ever been a critic or not. The reason that anyone can understand those pedestrian but profound works is not thanks to the critics but because of the core of the lasting value itself[对呀，这个地方总结的很好]. For those works of art which have lasting value do not need any critics to evaluate, therefore the belief that it is the critic who gives the society the lasting value of art is unwarranted. 有总结的意识固然很好，但是仅就此段来说，你要论证的是艺术家和艺术作品本身的价值，把这句总结还是来正面说A，这句放到对C的批判上

On the other hand, one cannot lose sight of the facts that during the human history, there did exist the “accident” that the value, at least until today it is a kind of lasting value, of the art should thank the critic by whose evaluating it deserves its value. Van Gough’s work is an exact case in point. One cannot say that Van Gough’s work will not be as famous as today but for the help of the critic but one can say that at least not that fast. 这段说C的价值

To sum up, since the lasting value of art can be toughed by most of us, the critics seem not to deserve such a reputation that it is they who give the lasting value of art to the society. However, the society cannot go without them, for there, indeed, are some of works of art that have lasting value but common people cannot understand.

总体上安排有问题，文中TS明确说了C有传造价值的可能，A本身就传造价值，那么B2是对A的肯定，可以，B3是对C的肯定，尽管稍显单薄，但也可以，B1的论述打乱全文，B1的态度是negative，就你TS来讲，没有否定C的作用呀：改进意见：肯定A，然后让步。先说B2肯定A；再说B1，否定C，但要和肯定A挂钩；最后B3的让步，这样我觉得合适一点，不要on the other hand，你前面两段是否定C，后面那么点就肯定了C，至少我感觉不会太突然，文字上没有问题，很好，句式也相当不错，值得学习

sblbaslerUID: 175229

其实我那段排比并不是说艺术怎么永恒（永恒不用说，千百年了还不永恒么）而是说永恒的艺术不需要人来show。
关于斑竹说我第一段的论述的问题其实我第一段炳不是一种否定的态度而还是注重在lasting这个问题上的。

boyjimUID: 125249

排比用得很棒啊！不过真得有点长~哈哈 等着鬼哥哥光临把！

sblbaslerUID: 175229

哈哈，恭候鬼鬼来“发泄”哈哈，就是那么个意思了。看了他批（我也记不住叫什么名）的恐怖呀！

ivyshoulUID: 195537

The past decades witnessed a trend that the critic plays an increasingly essential role in the process of evaluating the value of art: it is the critic who gives the society something of lasting value. Just logical, this argument may be, I, however, advocate that it is possible that the critic may give the society something of value, but it is something of the lasting value that is given to the society by the artist.

There is no denying and as the history witnessed that the critics did give the society something of the value of art, which, however, hardly can be seen as lasting. The simple reason is that one cannot rule out the possibility that the critic "works" for the artist: in the era of admiring wealth leading to the promotion of some critic’s attention on the interest of himself but not the value of art, some scandals about art arouse------that some work of art is of great value yesterday but of great dreg today had indeed happened in our reality.如果要说现在有些critic基于功利目的没有客观的很好的评价艺术品,那么同样的,现在有些艺术家也追求名利,那这样的艺术家创造的也是lasting value吗?如果你同意不是,那为什么这里只贬了critic而忽略了artist中也存在相同的情况呢? Another reason is that granted the critic is honest, one cannot guarantee that he or she is not confined by the society one lives in------ even though the critic makes the alleged right decision today, one cannot conclude that it is right for ever, or even tomorrow. Therefore, critic cannot give the society the lasting value of art, for critic, but not the lasting value, is restricted by the time,

The truly lasting value of art is engendered in the very inception of the work by the artist. As far as one concerns, the truly lasting value of art shows the beauty to the majority of people rather than the other artists; the truly lasting value of art forces the vast amount of people to feel the art by heart rather than let them understand it by the knowledge that the critics teach them. Anyone will generate a kind of awe to the god when he or she stands in front of Sphinx and looks at her alleged smile, whether he or she really knows the answer of her riddle or not; Anyone will feel a kind of heartquake towards life and when he or she listens to Beethoven's symphony, whether he or she has learned the basic knowledge of music or not; Anyone will burst out a kind of piety when he or she walks along the chapel in the Vatican whether he or she appreciates the Sistine chapel fresco , whether he or she has been taught by Michelangelo or not; Anyone will arouse a kind of evaluating of beauty when he or she has watched the Venus and the mystery smile of Mona Lisa, whether he or she has ever been a critic or not.排比句很厉害,赞一个先!但是我不同意你的观点.就拿贝多芬的交响乐来说,我们一般人真的理解它的全部的,深层的涵义吗?大部分人只是觉得很有气势啊很好听啊什么的.甚嚣尘上的Mona Lisa的微笑,又有几个普通人是真的明白了呢?至少我觉得我见过的人里面没几个会欣赏的.so,我觉得critic的专业评论是非常重要的 The reason that anyone can understand those pedestrian but profound works is not thanks to the critics but because of the core of the lasting value itself. For those works of art which have lasting value do not need any critics to evaluate, therefore the belief that it is the critic who gives the society the lasting value of art is unwarranted.

On the other hand, one cannot lose sight of the facts that during the human history, there did exist the “accident” that the value, at least until today it is a kind of lasting value, of the art should thank the critic by whose evaluating it deserves its value. Van Gough’s work is an exact case in point. One cannot say that Van Gough’s work will not be as famous as today but for the help of the critic but one can say that at least not that fast.

To sum up, since the lasting value of art can be toughed by most of us, the critics seem not to deserve such a reputation that it is they who give the lasting value of art to the society. However, the society cannot go without them, for there, indeed, are some of works of art that have lasting value but common people cannot understand.

咔咔,我的今天写了一般夭折了
明天贴出来帮忙看看啊

sblbaslerUID: 175229

对于你提出的问题我想说的是任何事情都有可能，我为了说明我的问题就要引用一方面的现象但决不是去否定另一方面！
关于例子的问题，人们能理解到的就是他的lasting value 至于再深的问题就不是大众所考虑的了。难道你能说那些作品人们理解不到那钟深度，如果作品真的有那么深的话，作品就不是masterpiece了么。
你的文章写好了PM给我