ISSUE176 第一篇ISSUE（艺术类） 欢迎批评指正,谢谢

wangchangxiaoUID: 2123968

题目：” The function of science is to reassure; the prupose of art is to upset. There lies the value of each.

提纲:”
第一段:(我第一次写,基本按照北美范文的模式)提出态度:艺术有些情况UPSET有些REASSURE,作者混淆了科学的功能.总体态度大正小负.
第二段:先小让步,指出艺术REASSURE的情况,例子(不知道怎么说)
第三段:指出艺术UPSET的情况,例子(艺术的批判性带来的不安)
第四段:指出科学功能reveal the truism,并论述这一功能可能带来的RESSUARE的情况例子(精算学Actuarial Science 减少不确定性,带来安心的效果)
第五段:指出科学的两面性(与范文中指出科学不断颠覆传统观念的说法有所不同),即UPSET的情况,例子(自动化带来的失业和核泄露)
第五段:做出总结.

正文:
    The speaker asserts that the science can only fulfill its value by reassuring and the art's significance lies merely in its think it unfairly generalizes about the art's value while totally distorts the function of science.
   
     Turn first to the arts. It is true in some cases that arts does reassure. During most of western history before the 19th century, the nature of art had been determined mainly by the government the church, the aristocracy--who embody the most powerful elite that time, as a result, artists were craftsmen at the service of leaders, and much of their work were created in order to reassure so that the public could be more easy to control.
   
     However, in many cases, arts serves to upset .For instance, beginning about 1800,as the decadence of the government and church's power of controlling arts,more artists gradually begun to use arts as a medium to express their unique passion and criticism about the society. For example, the French painter, Honore Dmier, used his pencil to protest political oppression in the 1830s.Daumier,French painter, was imprisoned for his caricatures of the king. Apparently, their works are not reassuring, instead, they upset to their deepest private feelings and the criticism of society. Or consider Henrik Ibsen, who was almost run out of town for a play that showed the intention of a resort to poison its customers with contaminated water as long as the tourists' dollars kept pouring in. We can even conclude that the most significant arts is deeply provocative ,as the Georges Braques said ,"science reassures us, the arts disturb us."
   
    When it comes to the function of science, in my opinion, the speaker's conclusion are completely wrongheaded. The essential objective of science, in my view, is to reveal the truism about the universe, the society and ourselves. Sometimes this revelation may provide some assuring sense. For example, the revelation of Actuarial Science, concerned with analyzing the adverse financial consequences of unpredictable losses and with designing mechanism to cushion the harmful financial effects of such losses, provide us with some comfortable reassuring feelings because by it we can control our future to some extent.
   
    However, there are many cases where scientific revelation clearly upsets our original goals and makes us anxious or even scaring. For example, the progress in  the science of automation, contributing to the development of many industry, has led an significant number of works to find themselves unemployed and lacking the quality required by the high-tech occupations of postindustrial society. Apparently, for those people, the revelation of science "upset" --at any rate for short periods--their common lives. You may disagree with this "upset" because in the long run automation may provide more "assuring" than "upset". Then consider the disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear-power plant in the Soviet Union in 1986 or such events like the accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear-power plant in 1979.Here,absolutely,the revelation of science show its devastating power and strongly scares us, besides, it also demonstrates that the objective of science is not to upset or reassure, but to discover the real world.
   
    In sum, the speaker unfairly generalizes the intention of art, both of which serve to assure in some circumstances, while to upset in other cases. When referring to science, the writer absolutely disregard that the true value of science lies in its revelation of truth, whether reassuring of upsetting.



[ 本帖最后由 wangchangxiao 于 2006-12-26 11:51 编辑 ]

wangchangxiaoUID: 2123968

自己先顶一把,那个字不知道为什么变那么大了,不好意思,影响了阅读,欢迎大家多多指教,菜鸟谢谢大家了.

approachUID: 2101189

http://bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/thread-208286-1-1.html
请修改您的发贴格式,改好后回复此短消息,再将主题打开.
回复消息时候附上此作文的连接.

norman518UID: 188582

The speaker asserts that the science can only fulfill its value by reassuring and the art's significance lies merely in its think [thinking that or that] it unfairly generalizes about the art's value while totally distorts the function of science. [你的Thesis sentence没表达明白：究竟是speaker的观点；还是你的观点---最好分开写，明确表达的的观点、态度]        Turn first to the arts. It is true in some cases that arts does [单数] reassure. During most of western history before the 19th century, the nature of art had been determined mainly by the government the church, the aristocracy--who embody the most powerful elite that time, as a result, artists were craftsmen at the service of leaders, and much of their work were created in order to reassure so that the public could be more easy to control.        However, in many cases, arts serves [单数] to upset. For instance, beginning about 1800, as the decadence of the government and church's power of controlling arts, [空格]more artists gradually begun to use arts as a medium to express their unique passion and criticism about the society. For example, the French painter, Honore Dmier[是谁呀？这个画家你也认识？], used his pencil to protest political oppression in the 1830s.Daumier, [空格，太多了，以后记住]French painter, was imprisoned for his caricatures of the king. Apparently, their works are not reassuring, instead, they upset to their deepest private feelings and the criticism of society. Or consider Henrik Ibsen, who was almost run out of town for a play that showed the intention of a resort to poison its customers with contaminated water as long as the tourists' dollars kept pouring in[不明白什么意思，建议改写后告诉我，OK？]. We can even conclude that the most significant arts is deeply provocative, as the Georges Braques said, "science reassures us, the arts disturb us."
[你认识的艺术家好多，怎么积累的？]       When it comes to the function of science, in my opinion, the speaker's conclusion are completely wrongheaded. The essential objective of science, in my view, is to reveal the truism about the universe, the society and ourselves. Sometimes this revelation may provide some assuring sense. For example, the revelation of Actuarial Science, concerned with analyzing the adverse financial consequences of unpredictable losses and with designing mechanism to cushion [是这个意思：alleviate] the harmful financial effects of such losses, provide us with some comfortable reassuring feelings because by it we can control our future to some extent.       However, there are many cases where scientific revelation clearly upsets our original goals and makes us anxious or even scaring [scared]. For example, the progress in the science of automation, contributing to the development of many industry [industries], has led an significant number of works [workers] to find themselves[完全可以去掉，就用一个分词unemployed] unemployed and lacking the quality required by the high-tech occupations of postindustrial society. Apparently, for those people, the revelation of science "upset"--at any rate for short periods--their common lives. You may disagree with this "upset" because in the long run automation may provide more "assuring" than "upset"[你还会用辨证的手法，不简单---但感觉不恰当，一个段落中最好不要有however等转折意思]. Then consider the disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear-power plant in the Soviet Union in 1986 or such events like the accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear-power plant in 1979. Here, absolutely, the revelation of science show its devastating power and strongly scares us, besides, it also demonstrates that the objective of science is not to upset or reassure, but to discover the real world. [原来你在对比论证—是高手的风格]       In sum, the speaker unfairly generalizes the intention of art, both [both怎么讲?说的是结果的正反两方面？] of which serve to assure in some circumstances, while to upset in other cases. When referring to science, the writer absolutely disregard that the true value of science lies in its revelation of truth, whether reassuring of upsetting.

1．  感觉你破题很独特也很到位；
2.  你的有些用法也很独特，有高手的风格---不知道能肯定正确吗？

[ 本帖最后由 norman518 于 2006-12-25 03:57 编辑 ]

taroUID: 2286098

The speaker asserts that science can only fulfill its value by reassuring and art's significance lies merely in its think.(? ) It unfairly generalizes about art's value while totally distorts the function of science.
   
     Turn first to art. It is true in some cases that arts does reassure. During most of western history before the 19th century, the nature of art has been determined mainly by the government, the church, (and) the aristocracy, who embody the most powerful elite (at) that time. As a result, artists were craftsmen at the service of leaders, and much of their work was created in order to reassure( reassure what?) so that the public could be more easy to control.
   
     However, in many cases, art serves to upset. For instance, beginning about (from? )1800, as the decadence of the government and church's power of controlling arts, more artists gradually began to use art as a medium to express their unique passion and criticism about society. For example, the French painter, Honore Dmier, used his pencil to protest political oppression in the 1830s. Daumier, (这里怎么又不用冠词呢,疑惑)French painter, was imprisoned for his caricatures of the king. Apparently, their works are not reassuring, instead, they upset to their deepest private feelings and the criticism of society.(这句没有看懂) Or consider Henrik Ibsen, who was (was删掉,不然出现两个动词)almost run out of town for a play that showed the intention of a resort to poison its customers with contaminated water as long as the tourists' dollars kept pouring in. We can even conclude that the most significant arts is deeply provocative ,as the Georges Braques said ,"science reassures us, the arts disturb us."
   
    When it comes to the function of science, in my opinion, the speaker's conclusion are (is)completely wrongheaded. The essential objective of science, in my view, is to reveal the truism about the universe, the society and ourselves. Sometimes this revelation may provide some assuring sense. For example, the revelation of Actuarial Science, concerned with analyzing the adverse financial consequences of unpredictable losses and with designing mechanism to cushion the harmful financial effects of such losses, provide(s) us with some comfortable reassuring feelings because by it we can control our future to some extent(感觉有些别扭，可改1下).
   
    However, there are many cases where scientific revelation clearly upsets our original goals and makes us anxious or even scaring. For example, the progress in  the science of automation, contributing to the development of many industry, has led an(a) significant number of works (workers) to(删去to) find themselves unemployed and lacking the quality required by the high-tech occupations of postindustrial society. Apparently, for those people, the revelation of science "upset" --at any rate for short periods--their common lives. You may disagree with this "upset" because in the long run automation may provide more "assuring" than "upset". Then consider the disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear-power plant in the Soviet Union in 1986 or such events like the accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear-power plant in 1979.Here,absolutely,the revelation of science show(s) its devastating power and strongly scares us. (重起1句吧) Besides, it also demonstrates that the objective of science is not to upset or reassure, but to discover the real world.
   
    In sum, the speaker unfairly generalizes the intention of art, both of which serve to assure in some circumstances, while to upset in other cases. When referring to science, the writer absolutely disregard that the true value of science lies in its revelation of truth, whether reassuring of upsetting.
FYR
1 science & art 前面是否需要冠词the ？题目中没有。society 前面似乎也不用加，除非特指。
2 art or arts? 作文中用法不一致。题目中为art.
3 totally, completely, absolutely这类词是否过于绝对？建议少用。
4 第3段和5段均用however 起句有点乏味呢。
例子丰富（那么难记的画家名怎么记住的啊？） 逻辑明晰是本篇亮点哩。

wang984UID: 2284383

The speaker asserts that the science can only fulfill its value by reassuring and the art's significance lies merely in its think (???句子没有完整的结束？) it unfairly generalizes about the art's value while totally distorts the function of science.
   
     Turn first to the arts. It is true in some cases that arts does reassure. During most of western history before the 19th century, the nature of art had been determined mainly by the government (, ) the church, (and) the aristocracy--who embody the most powerful elite that time, as a result, artists were craftsmen at the service of leaders, and much of their work were created in order to reassure so that the public could be more easy to control.
   
     However, in many cases, arts serves to upset .For instance, beginning about 1800,as the decadence of the government and church's power of controlling arts, more artists gradually begun to use arts as a medium to express their unique passion and criticism about the society. For example, the French painter, Honore Dmier (Honore Daumier是不是这个？), used his pencil to protest political oppression in the 1830s.Daumier,French painter, (重复French painter?) was imprisoned for his caricatures of the king. Apparently, their works are not reassuring, instead, they upset to their deepest private feelings and the criticism of society. Or consider Henrik Ibsen, who was almost run out of town for a play that showed the intention of a resort to poison its customers with contaminated water as long as the tourists' dollars kept pouring in. () We can even conclude that the most significant arts is deeply provocative ,as the Georges Braques said ,"science reassures us, the arts disturb us."
   
    When it comes to the function of science, in my opinion, the speaker's conclusion are (is) completely wrongheaded. The essential objective of science, in my view, is to reveal the truism about the universe, the society and ourselves. Sometimes this revelation may provide some assuring sense. For example, the revelation of Actuarial Science, concerned with analyzing the adverse financial consequences of unpredictable losses and with designing mechanism to cushion the harmful financial effects of such losses, provide (provides) us with some comfortable reassuring feelings because by it we can control our future to some extent.
   
    However, there are many cases where scientific revelation clearly upsets our original goals and makes us anxious or even scaring. For example, the progress in  the science of automation, contributing to the development of many industry, has led an significant number of works to find themselves unemployed and lacking the quality required by the high-tech occupations of postindustrial society. Apparently, for those people, the revelation of science "upset" --at any rate for short periods--their common lives. You may disagree with this "upset" because in the long run automation may provide more "assuring" than "upset". Then consider the disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear-power plant in the Soviet Union in 1986 or such events like the accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear-power plant in 1979.Here, absolutely, the revelation of science show (shows) its devastating power and strongly scares us, besides, it also demonstrates that the objective of science is not to upset or reassure, but to discover the real world.
   
    In sum, the speaker unfairly generalizes the intention of art, both of which serve to assure in some circumstances, while to upset in other cases. When referring to science, the writer absolutely disregard that the true value of science lies in its revelation of truth, whether reassuring of upsetting (neither nor?).

个人意见仅供参考：
根据全文的论述，中心是明确的，但未在文章关键位置（首尾）用肯定语气给出，而只是否定题目说法。应当明确摆明自己观点，然后进行论证。
关于艺术的作用在历史早期和后期的区别作为例证，有创见，值得借鉴。
画家的例证是不是太专，阅卷者如果不知道是否会有负面效果呢？
论证过程，起承转合感觉不错，比较到位。
文章感觉不错，也只能这么说多了。



[ 本帖最后由 wang984 于 2006-12-27 23:18 编辑 ]