issue144 展翅高飞小组Serendip(火星)以前的作业，重新改了

SerendipUID: 2227806

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.

Syllabus:
1. Artist create intrinsic value, but the value may not lasting.
2. Critic discovers true art.
3. Critic leads art to the right direction.
4. Critic makes art more popular among common people.

I fundamentally agree with the speaker, whose viewpoint is based on the issue that artist creates great value. However, to fully achieve superb value, as the speaker defined--lasting value, we must turn to critic for help, because they provide artist direction, destiny and so on.

I concur with the speaker that it's artist that gives society something of lasting value. Because art is a kind of creative skill, which combine the substance with artist's feeling and then art is generated. And the intrinsic value of the art depends on various factors, such as the skill, the reputation of the artist, and the taste of the watcher or so. In the process, the artist plays important role. We can witness the value of the masterpieces of Da Vinci, whose paintings are all of great value nowadays, because of his creativity; and the value is even enhancing. But here comes the question---how comes the lasting value of his painting? I can hardly believe that he had got the fame before the time he finished his first painting. So what brings his paintings the value?

Critic, who evaluates works of art, might be the people "create" masterpieces, while the artist creates works of art. The critic must be a good artist, which means he must know how to appreciate the works. He knows well the true value of a work, and he must judge the work with no inclination. Therefore, he can dig out true art from a flock of so-called art. Take Xueqin Cao, a famous Chinese writer, as an example, he wrote masterpiece--Dream of The Red Chamber, but the work was not widely known by people before he died. It's critic that found his book, and gave it high appraisal. Years later, his work becomes a nationwide hot book, and it gains worldwide reputation now. Therefore, although artist create art, yet only by critics’ discover, can the true lasting value be sparkled.

Moreover, critic has the function of guidance. There's a wide spread phrases among nowaday movie critics---Style of motion pictures before 70s can only be regarded as a kind of retrospect. Moviemakers are put their whole heart into trying to make their movies different from the others. Sometimes, they have to turn back to fetch old style, after all, audiences can hardly watch many old movies. So the phrase I mentioned above emerged as guidance. Therefore, the moviemakers know that never an old style appropriate in the nowaday movie market. In such circumstance, they just stop trying to be creative that way. By critics’ regulating, art can step on the right road and generate great value.

Besides, critics and introduce art to common people. They can write articles which may boost people's interest, and then people will have more inclination to have a look at the art. Because one of the values of art is pleasure, it cannot be confined in a small range. With more people gaining the knowledge of appreciating art, artists themselves can absorb more raw materials which will give him an open mind. Thereby more fine art can be created.

In sum, I agree with the speaker that artist gives society lasting value, since it's artist who create art. However, without the discovery, guidance and introduction of critics, art can only be the kind buried deep underground. As is said in a famous movie Mona Lisa's Smile—“art is art until you say it's art”.


自己改了一下，发现句式方面还是很不怎么地，努力先背点句子。

[ 本帖最后由 Serendip 于 2006-8-10 23:01 编辑 ]

expire7UID: 2160574

发帖要求了标题格式的，请修改。

jallineUID: 2192970

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.

Syllabus:
1. Artist create intrinsic value, but the value may not lasting.
2. Critic discovers true art.
3. Critic leads art to the right direction.
4. Critic makes art more popular among common people.

I fundamentally agree with the speaker, whose viewpoint is based on the issue that artist creates great value. However, to fully achieve superb value, as the speaker defined--lasting value, we must turn to critic for help, because they provide artist direction, destiny and so on.[destiny何解?]

I concur with the speaker that it's artist that gives society something of lasting value. Because art is a kind of creative skill, which combines the substance with artist's feeling and then art is generated. And the intrinsic value of the art depends on various factors, such as the skill, the reputation of the artist, and the taste of the watcher or so. In the process, the artist plays an important role. We can witness the value of the masterpieces of Da Vinci, whose paintings are all of great value nowadays, because of his creativity; and the value is even enhancing. But here comes the question---how comes the lasting value of his painting? I can hardly believe that he had got the fame before the time he finished his first painting. So what brings his paintings the-->such value?[最后这一句想要启下,但是承上部分过渡的不是很自然. 我没有找到how the question comes的答案, 假设是不是作的太极端而减弱了说服力]

Critic, who evaluates works of art, might be the people "create" masterpieces, while the artist creates works of art. The critic must be, in a sense, a good artist , which means he must know how to appreciate the works. He knows well the true value of a work, and he must judge the work with no inclination. Therefore, he can dig out true art from a flock of so-called art. Take Xueqin Cao, a famous Chinese writer, as an example, he wrote a masterpiece--Dream of The Red Chamber, but the work was not widely known by people before he died. It's critic that found his book, and gave it high appraisal. Years later, his work becomes a nationwide hot book, and it gains worldwide reputation now. (years later and now contradicted? -->After years, ...)Therefore, although artist creates art, yet only by critics’ discover,(这个逗号多余了吧? 我不太确定) can the true lasting value be sparkled.

Moreover, critic has the function of guidance. There's a wide spread phrases among nowaday movie critics---Style of motion pictures before 70s can only be regarded as a kind of retrospect. Moviemakers are put[putting] their whole heart into trying to make their movies different from the[deletet] others. Sometimes, they have to turn back to fetch old style, after all, audiences can hardly watch many old movies. So the phrase I mentioned above emerged as guidance. Therefore, the moviemakers know that never an old style appropriate in the nowaday movie market. In such circumstance, they just stop trying to be creative that way. By critics’ regulating, art can step on the right road and generate great value.[感觉critic在这个事例中的作用并没有得到充分的强调, 而且中间的逻辑关系有些混乱, 比如后面说的great value在例子中没有明确的对应]

Besides, critics and[could] introduce art to common people. They can write articles which may boost people's interest, and then people will have more inclination to have a look at the art. Because one of the values of art is pleasure, it cannot be confined in a small range. [这句话后半句建议写的更详细些, such as...]With more people gaining the knowledge of appreciating art, artists themselves can absorb more raw materials which will give him an open mind. Thereby more fine art can be created.

In sum, I agree with the speaker that artist gives society lasting value, since it's artist who creates art. However, without the discovery[建议改为appreciation], guidance and introduction of critics, art can only[possibly 觉得还是委婉些好] be the kind buried [不通]deep underground. As is said in a famous movie Mona Lisa's Smile—“art is art until you say it's art”.[结尾这句话不错,贴切点题, 收下了~]

第三段句子之间内在的逻辑关系还需加强一些
其他几个地方感觉论述展开的不自然, 具体见文中

[ 本帖最后由 jalline 于 2006-7-12 23:55 编辑 ]

neuwolfUID: 2190099

说明：<>表要省去，()增加，(原文/修改后)

I fundamentally agree with the speaker, whose viewpoint is based on the issue that artist creates great value. However, to fully achieve superb value, as the speaker defined--lasting value, we must turn to critic for help, because they provide artist direction, destiny and so on.

I concur with the speaker that it's artist (that/who) gives society something of lasting value. Because art is a kind of creative skill, which combine the substance with artist's feeling and then art is generated.(这句怪怪的，拆成两句吧) And the intrinsic value of the art depends on various factors, such as the skill, the reputation of the artist, and the taste of the watcher or so.(没看懂这句有什么用) In the process, the artist plays important role. We can witness the value of the masterpieces of Da Vinci, whose paintings are all of great value nowadays, because of his creativity; and the value is even enhancing. But here comes the question---how comes the lasting value of his painting? I can hardly believe that he had got the fame before the time he finished his first painting. So what brings his paintings the value?

Critic, who evaluates works of art, might be the people "create" masterpieces, while the artist creates works of art. The critic must be a good artist, which means he must know how to appreciate the works. He knows well the true value of a work, and he must judge the work (with no/without) inclination. Therefore, he can dig out true art from a flock of so-called art. Take Xueqin Cao, a famous Chinese writer, as an example, he wrote masterpiece--Dream of The Red Chamber, but the work was not widely known by people before he died. It's critic that found his book, and gave it high appraisal. Years later, his work becomes a nationwide hot book, and it gains worldwide reputation now. Therefore, although artist create art, yet only by critics’ discover, can the true lasting value be sparkled.

Moreover, critic has the function of guidance. There's a wide spread phrases among nowaday movie critics---Style of motion pictures before 70s can only be regarded as a kind of retrospect. Moviemakers are put their whole heart into trying to make their movies different from the others. Sometimes, they have to turn back to fetch old style, after all, audiences can hardly watch many old movies. So the phrase I mentioned above emerged as guidance. Therefore, the moviemakers know that never an old style appropriate in the nowaday movie market. In such circumstance, they just stop trying to be creative that way. By critics’ regulating, art can step on the right road and generate great value.

Besides, critics <and> introduce art to common people. They can write articles which may boost people's interest, and then people will have more inclination to have a look at the art. Because one of the values of art is pleasure, it cannot be confined in a small range. With more people gaining the knowledge of appreciating art, artists themselves can absorb more raw materials which will give him an open mind. Thereby more fine art can be created.

In sum, I agree with the speaker that artist gives society lasting value, since it's artist who create art. However, without the discovery, guidance and introduction of critics, art can only be the kind buried deep underground. As is said in a famous movie Mona Lisa's Smile—“art is art until you say it's art”.

观点鲜明，论述深刻
有些句子应该可以写得更好，一起努力吧

wandouhhUID: 190486

I fundamentally agree with the speaker, whose viewpoint is based on the issue that artist creates great value. However, to fully achieve superb value, as the speaker defined--lasting value, we must turn to critic for help, because they provide artist direction, destiny(provide destiny，很奇怪的说法) and so on.

I concur with the speaker that it's artist that gives society something of lasting value. Because art is a kind of creative skill, which combine(+s) the substance with artist's feeling and then art is generated. And the intrinsic value of the art depends on various factors, such as the skill, the reputation of the artist, and the taste of the watcher or so. In the process, the artist plays important role. We can witness the value of the masterpieces of Da Vinci, whose paintings are all of great value nowadays, because of his creativity; and the value is even enhancing. But here comes the question---how comes the lasting value of his painting? I can hardly believe that he had got the fame before the time he finished his first painting. So what brings his paintings the value?

Critic, who evaluates works of art, might be the people "create" masterpieces, while the artist creates works of art. The critic must be a good artist, which means he must know how to appreciate the works. He knows well the true value of a work, and he must judge the work with no inclination. Therefore, he can dig out true art from a flock of so-called art. Take Xueqin Cao, a famous Chinese writer, as an example, he wrote masterpiece--Dream of The Red Chamber, but the work was not widely known by people before he died. It's critic that found his book, and gave it high appraisal. Years later, his work becomes a nationwide hot book, and it gains worldwide reputation now. Therefore, although artist create art, yet only by critics’ discover, can the true lasting value be sparkled.(这个例子很好，收下了！)

Moreover, critic has the function of guidance. There's a wide spread phrases among nowaday movie critics---Style of motion pictures before 70s can only be regarded as a kind of retrospect. Moviemakers are put their whole heart into trying to make their movies different from the others. Sometimes, they have to turn back to fetch old style, after all, audiences can hardly watch many old movies. So the phrase I mentioned above emerged as guidance. Therefore, the moviemakers know that never an old style appropriate in the nowaday movie market. In such circumstance, they just stop trying to be creative that way. By critics’ regulating, art can step on the right road and generate great value.

Besides, critics and introduce art to common people. They can write articles which may boost people's interest, and then people will have more inclination to have a look at the art. Because one of the values of art is pleasure, it cannot be confined in a small range. With more people gaining the knowledge of appreciating art, artists themselves can absorb more raw materials which will give him an open mind. Thereby more fine art can be created.

In sum, I agree with the speaker that artist gives society lasting value, since it's artist who create art. However, without the discovery, guidance and introduction of critics, art can only be the kind buried deep underground. As is said in a famous movie Mona Lisa's Smile—“art is art until you say it's art”.
总体感觉非常好，读着很流畅。我的水平有限，就拜读你的大作借鉴你的例子了。还有结尾非常精彩。

我楼上是HOGUID: 2228366

I fundamentally agree with the speaker, whose viewpoint is based on the issue that artist creates great value. However, to fully achieve superb value, as the speaker defined--lasting value, we must turn to critic for help, because they provide artist direction, destiny and so on.（以陈述题目观点+表明立场开头。感觉首段少了点令人眼前一亮的句子，新东方老师说那些开头出现闪光句会对分数起些作用的）

I concur with the speaker that it's artist that gives society something of lasting value. Because art is a kind of creative skill, which combine the substance with artist's feeling and then art is generated（我建议把这两句和为一句，这样文章会显得很整体不会给人一盘散沙的感觉了）. And the intrinsic value of the art depends on various factors, such as the skill, the reputation of the artist, and the taste of the watcher or so. In the process, the artist plays important role. We can witness the value of the masterpieces of Da Vinci, whose paintings are all of great value nowadays, because of his creativity; and the value is even enhancing. But here comes the question---how comes the lasting value of his painting? I can hardly believe that he had got the fame before the time he finished his first painting. So what brings his paintings the value?

（感觉缺少点和上段连接的词，感觉有点和上文连不起来）Critic, who evaluates works of art, might be the people "create" masterpieces, while the artist creates works of art. The critic must be a good artist, which means he must know how to appreciate the works. He knows well the true value of a work, and he must judge the work with no inclination. Therefore, he can dig out true art from a flock of so-called art. Take Xueqin Cao, a famous Chinese writer, as an example, he wrote masterpiece--Dream of The Red Chamber, but the work was not widely known by people before he died. It's critic that found his book, and gave it high appraisal. Years later, his work becomes a nationwide hot book, and it gains worldwide reputation now. Therefore, although artist create art, yet only by critics’ discover, can the true lasting value be sparkled.

Moreover, critic has the function of guidance. There's a wide spread phrases among nowaday（应该是nowadays吧，不知道是不是打字错误） movie critics---Style of motion pictures before 70s can only be regarded as a kind of retrospect. Moviemakers are put their whole heart into trying to make their movies different from the others. Sometimes, they have to turn back to fetch old style, after all, audiences can hardly watch many old movies. So the phrase I mentioned above emerged as guidance. Therefore, the moviemakers know that never an old style appropriate in the nowaday(同上)  movie market. In such circumstance, they just stop trying to be creative that way. By critics’ regulating, art can step on the right road and generate great value.

Besides, critics and introduce art to common people. They can write articles which may boost people's interest, and then people will have more inclination to have a look at the art. Because one of the values of art is pleasure, it cannot be confined in a small range. With more people gaining the knowledge of appreciating art, artists themselves can absorb more raw materials which will give him an open mind. Thereby more fine art can be created.

In sum, I agree with the speaker that artist gives society lasting value, since it's artist who create art. However, without the discovery, guidance and introduction of critics, art can only be the kind buried deep underground. As is said in a famous movie Mona Lisa's Smile—“art is art until you say it's art”.

整篇文章的中心思想表达得不错，但对于细节上有待提高，没有什么长句，大多使用的是简单句，给人一种一盘散沙的感觉。偶尔有些小错误。文章开头和结尾缺少一些个闪光句。字数是不是太多了，考试的时候来得及打这么多字吗？

SerendipUID: 2227806

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.

Syllabus:
1. Artist create intrinsic value, but the value may not lasting.
2. Critic discovers true art.
3. Critic leads art to the right direction.
4. Critic makes art more popular among common people.

I fundamentally agree with the speaker, whose viewpoint is based on the issue that artist creates great value. However, to fully achieve superb value, as the speaker defined--lasting value, we must turn to critic for help, because they provide artist direction, goal and so on.

I concur with the speaker that it's artist that gives society something of lasting value, because art is a kind of creative skill, which combines the substance with artist's feeling, and then art is generated. And the intrinsic value of the art depends on various factors, such as the skill, the reputation of the artist. In the process, the artist plays an important role. We can witness the value of the masterpieces of Da Vinci, whose paintings are all of great value nowadays, because of his creativity; and the value is even enhancing. But here comes the question---how comes the lasting value of his painting? Since the task of a painter is just painting, regardless whether he or she have gained adequate fame, so he can hardly let people know his works all by himself or herself, let alone infuse them with lasting value, which is partly decided by people’s points of view to some extent.

Therefore here comes the critic, who evaluates works of art, might be the people "create" masterpieces, while the artist creates works of art. The critic must be, in a sense, a good artist, which means he must know how to appreciate the works. He knows well the true value of a work, and he must judge the work without inclination. Therefore, he can dig out true art from a flock of so-called art. Take Xueqin Cao, a famous Chinese writer, as an example, he wrote masterpiece--Dream of The Red Chamber, but the work was not widely known by people before he died. It's critic that found his book, and gave it high appraisal. Years later after his death, his work becomes a nationwide hot book, and it gains worldwide reputation now. Therefore, although artist create art, yet only by critics’ discover, can the true lasting value be sparkled.

Moreover, critic has the function of guidance. There's a wide spread phrases among nowaday movie critics---Style of motion pictures before 70s can only be regarded as a kind of retrospect. I cite this phrase to say that as moviemakers put their whole heart into trying to make their movies different from others, and sometimes they have to turn back to fetch old style, after all, audiences can hardly watch many old movies, so in this circumstance, the phrase I mentioned above emerged as guidance. Therefore, the moviemakers know that never an old style appropriate in the nowaday movie market. In such circumstance, they just stop trying to be creative that way. By critics’ regulating, art can step on the right road and generate great value.

Besides, critics could introduce art to common people. They can write articles which may boost people's interest, and then people will have more inclination to have a look at the art. Because one of the values of art is pleasure, it cannot be confined in a small range. Consider the function of TV series, movies, and plays and so on. With more people gaining the knowledge of appreciating art, artists themselves can absorb more raw materials which will give him an open mind. Thereby more fine art can be created.`

In sum, I agree with the speaker that artist gives society lasting value, since it's artist who create art. However, without the appreciation, guidance and introduction of critics, art can possibly be the kind buried deep underground. As is said in a famous movie Mona Lisa's Smile—“art is art until you say it's art”.

SerendipUID: 2227806

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.


Whether it is artists or critics that imbue art works lasting value is a prevailing question. While it is rational for the arguer to assert that what the artists do gives society something of lasting value, we should not lose sight of the merit of those critcs.

The artists’ creativity servers as a tool of infusing art works forever soul, and then imbuing the society with lasting value. The intrinsic merit of art depends largely on the artist originality, along with his or her deft skill and his reputation in the society. Were we to appreciate those masterpieces, we would think of the effort and endeavor that the artists make to lend his or her offspring such marvelous visional banquet. The paintings by Picasso, famous for their abstract, illustrate us a mystery world beyond our quotidian experience; the music composed by Beethoven carves impressiveness on listener’s heart. Without these significant pieces of works, we may still live in a dark age, an era that lacks of mental support, but a craving for earthy matters. Thanks to these artists who provide us something lasting, gives us something that worthy of treasure.


Nonetheless, if it were not the critics, some works of art may still bury deeply under the dust, waiting for discovery. Numerous of masterpieces of works are found and instructed by critics. The critics have their advantage in that they are, in some sense, also artists, and they know the merit of a piece of works. This means that they can feel the innate meaning of art, and play a role as a bridge that abridges the gap between the artists and common people, the contemporary ones or even descendants. Take the paintings by Van Gogh as an example. In his living time, his painting was not favored by contemporary people since his style was so different from that of other painters. He died with no one knowing his works. But after his death, some critics found that his paintings were so excellent that people of the world should have a chance to watch them. These critics help to publicize the paintings of Van Gogh, and finally, he acquired the kudos of today. Therefore, albeit great artists, like Van Gogh, created high standard works, yet it is the critics who make their works last in the society.

Moreover, the critics have the meaning of guidance. The process of creating works of art is a kind of individual work, which is determined by artists’ individuality. Under such circumstance, critics regulate the way of art, and at the end help art get in on a right place. For example, an effective phrase reverberates throughout the hall of motion picture industry--- Style of motion pictures before 70s can only be regarded as a kind of retrospect rather than trigger, something for the purpose of intriguing creativity. I cites this examples to say that whenever a moviemaker turns back to look for something apposite for his or her new motion picture, he should not fetch those prior than 70s, since the phrase by critics tells them that those features are meaningless. Therefore the guidance of critics will inevitably contribute to a more attractive movie. Regulation recommendation is what critic brings to the society, and may be a relatively priceless treasure they bestowed the artists. From this point of view, the merit of critics avail artists to generate the value that are more prone to lasting in the society.

Consequently, we should not overlook the greatness of artists and the benefit of critics, after all, they are reciprocal. The artists should be respected and their painting should be well protected in order to stimulate their enthusiasm of creating more pieces of works. And in the mean time, we should carefully treat the critics’’ comment, since their wisdom introduction and advice will conduce to the booming development of art, and also endow works of art lasting value.

重新写了