issue144 【我们的彼岸-piggy2006第18次作业】又交晚咯。。。谢拍^@^！

piggy2006UID: 2272134

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.

Do something valuable for a long time in society given by artist or critic? Some people assert that the most valuable works staying for long are given by artists only, and they suppose not only do the critics provide no existent work, but also sometimes do they block the development of art. However, in my view, both artists and critics do give us something of lasting value.

There is no denying that artists create an abundant of artworks for our society. Just looking around, you can find that the space you stay in congests with kinds of works of art such as novels, films, music, paintings. Although the life of artists is short, their work will last forever. Ernest Hemingway, one of the most famous American novelist and short-story writer in the era between two world wars, published The Old Man and the Sea which won the 1953 Pulitzer Price in fiction. Through the process of the old man fighting against with nature constantly, the story encourage people face the troubles bravely. The spirit of the fiction Hemingway figured is a precious lasting treasure for society even after Hemingway's death so many years. Similarly, Van Gogh which is one of the founders of modern printing has enormous impact the whole fine arts, and his artworks as a tangible value have been maintained forever. Thus, things of lasting values as tangible assets are actually reflections of the artists' value.

To compare with, critics produce lasting values to society too, although this value is sometimes invisible. On the one hand, critics find the value of artworks and show them to people. Without the help of critics, the value of many artworks cannot be recognized by society. Like some curios, as we are ordinary people without any exact estimation ability, the professional evaluation from critics will tell us the value of the curios. On the other hand, critics can criticize something worthless and from a certain extent it will impel the development of art.(没想到好的例子。。。大家帮忙哈~) In addition, sometimes, critics are artists themselves. Edgar Allan Poe, known as a poet and a critic of America, is such a case. No one can negate the lasting value of both his works of art and his criticism. From the cases we can see critic as a part of art, plays an indispensable role which also gives society plenty of lasting value.

Also sometimes, for the subjectivity of critics, the existing value of some artworks may be disclaimed. Some critics may be utilized by political purpose or because of some personal subjectivity, their estimation will be affected. Before abstract expressionism, realistic painting in America was once to be the mainstream. In the year between 1930 and 1940, nearly every critic in America supposed that the realism was a style which American painting should be. Actually, from a perspective today, if American art insists realistic painting as a delegate of American artwork, the arts of America is difficult to be recognized in the international arena. The value of multitudinal of artworks was buried because of critics' ignorance. From this point, critics sometimes will be adverse for works of art.(这段差点不能自圆其说咯~呵呵~)

In conclusion all above, although sometimes the critics will block the development of arts because of objectivity, artist and critic are tow sides of art which both of them are mostly connected to give society something of lasting value.

花了很多时间查资料，阅读相关的艺术类文献。。。知识面窄啊。。。
谢谢大家修改哈!
^@^~

yaoyingUID: 2249342

咦？什么时候在哪布置的作业？我怎么不知道呢？

piggy2006UID: 2272134

昨天的作业咯。。。快点写啦~不然明天就堆起咯~

afgxUID: 2185359

Do something valuable for a long time in society given by artist or critic? (Whether artist or critic can give the lasting value in society?) Some people assert that the most valuable works staying for long are given by artists only, and they suppose not only do the critics provide no existent work, but also sometimes do they block the development of art. However, in my view, both artists and critics do give us something of lasting value.

There is no denying that artists create an abundant of artworks for our society. Just looking around, you can find that the space you stay in congests with kinds of works of art such as novels, films, music, paintings. Although the life of artists is short, their work will last forever. Ernest Hemingway, one of the most famous American novelist and short-story writer in the era between two world wars, published The Old Man and the Sea which won the 1953 Pulitzer Price in fiction. Through the process of the old man fighting against with nature constantly, the story encourage people face the troubles bravely. The spirit of the fiction Hemingway figured is a precious lasting treasure for society even after Hemingway's death so many years. Similarly, Van Gogh which is one of the founders of modern printing has enormous (enormously) impact the whole fine arts, and his artworks as a tangible value have been maintained forever. Thus, things of lasting values as tangible assets are actually reflections of the artists' value.

To compare with, critics produce lasting values to society too, although this value is sometimes invisible. On the one hand, critics find the value of artworks and show them to people. Without the help of critics, the value of many artworks cannot be recognized by society.（这句话有些绝对了） Like some curios, as we are ordinary people without any exact estimation ability, the professional evaluation from critics will tell us the value of the curios. On the other hand, critics can criticize something worthless and from a certain extent it will impel the development of art.(没想到好的例子。。。大家帮忙哈~) In addition, sometimes, critics are artists themselves. Edgar Allan Poe, known as a poet and a critic of America, is such a case. No one can negate the lasting value of both his works of art and his criticism.（这里我认为有点诡辩了，你没说清楚lasting value 是他作为艺术家创造的还是作为评论家创造的，而这段的意思是应该说明他是作为评论家创造的lasting value） From the cases we can see critic as a part of art, plays an indispensable role which also gives society plenty of lasting value.

Also sometimes, for the subjectivity of critics, the existing value of some artworks may be disclaimed. Some critics may be utilized by political purpose or because of some personal subjectivity, their（whose）estimation will be affected. Before abstract expressionism, realistic painting in America was once to be the mainstream. In the year between 1930 and 1940, nearly every critic in America supposed that the realism was a style which American painting should be. Actually, from a perspective today, if American art insists realistic painting as a delegate of American artwork,（他们不就是这么做的么？） the arts of America is difficult to be recognized in the international arena. The value of multitudinal of artworks was buried because of critics' ignorance. From this point, critics sometimes will be adverse for works of art.(这段差点不能自圆其说咯~呵呵~)
这段我没看懂你什么意思。

In conclusion all above, although sometimes the critics will block the development of arts because of objectivity（客观？）, artist and critic are tow sides of art which both of them are mostly connected to give society something of lasting value.

我认为文章有两个问题：
1．  你说评论家和艺术家共同创造价值，我认为应该把主要的篇幅放在评论家上，因为艺术家创造价值不证自明，或者说你可以说艺术家创造价值需要评论家的帮助（第二段）。
2．  我没有看懂第四段什么意思，你是想让步一下说评论家的负面作用么？这样好像对你的主题不利。
个人观点，仅供参考。

yaoyingUID: 2249342

Do something valuable for a long time in society given by artist or critic? Some people assert that the most valuable works staying for long are given by artists only, and they suppose not only do the critics provide no existent work, but also sometimes do they block the development of art. However, in my view, both artists and critics do give us something of lasting value根据你的观点似乎写成artists and critics give us sth…together比较好.

There is no denying that artists create an abundant of artworks for our society. Just looking around, you前人都说用第三人称比较好，即people can find that the space you stay in congests with kinds of works of art such as novels, films, music, paintings. Although the life of artists is short, their work will last forever. Ernest Hemingway, one of the most famous American novelist and short-story writer in the era between two world wars, published The Old Man and the Sea which won the 1953 Pulitzer Price in fiction. Through the process of the old man fighting against with nature constantly, the story encourage people face the troubles bravely. The spirit of the fiction Hemingway figured is a precious lasting treasure for society even after Hemingway's death so many years.这个表达方式对么？ Similarly, Van Gogh which is one of the founders of modern printing has enormous impact the whole fine arts, and his artworks as a tangible value have been maintained forever. Thus, things of lasting values as tangible assets are actually reflections of the artists' value.

To compare with, critics produce lasting values to society too, although this value is sometimes invisible. On the one hand, critics find the value of artworks and show them to people. Without the help of critics, the value of many artworks cannot be recognized by society. Like some curios, as we are ordinary people without any删掉 exact estimation ability, the professional evaluation from critics will tell us the value of the curios. On the other hand, critics can criticize something worthless and from a certain extent it will impel the development of art. 随便编一个例子吧，比如什么不值一看的垃圾小说啦 In addition, sometimes, critics are artists themselves.这一点不知道和批评家的贡献有什么关系？ Edgar Allan Poe, known as a poet and a critic of America, is such a case. No one can negate the lasting value of both his works of art and his criticism.这样一句似乎说不清楚 From the cases we can see critic as a part of art, plays playing an indispensable role which also gives society plenty of lasting value.

Also sometimes, for the subjectivity of critics, the existing value of some artworks may be disclaimed. Some critics may be utilized by political purpose or because of some personal subjectivity, so?their estimation will be affected. Before abstract expressionism, realistic painting in America was once to be the mainstream. In the year between 1930 and 1940, nearly every critic in America supposed that the realism was a style which American painting should be. Actually, from a perspective today, if American art insists realistic painting as a delegate of American artwork, the arts of America is difficult to be recognized in the international arena. The value of multitudinal of artworks was buried because of critics' ignorance.看见Alex的评语了，我是没什么发言权了，丝毫不懂，唉 From this point, critics sometimes will be adverse for works of art.
这段是挺悬的
In conclusion all above, although sometimes the critics will block the development of arts because of objectivity, artist and critic are tow sides of art which both of them are mostly connected to give society something of lasting value.

感觉写艺术类就是挺麻烦的，首先就是领域的障碍，而且还是相当难跨。

闲言少叙，我觉得问题基本上来说，论述无力，唉，我知道自己是几斤几两，所以说这话自己也感觉后背冒汗。例子比较丰富，看得出来piggy作了很多功课，但是在叙述例子的时候，如何分析观点就有点牵强了，就好像关于艺术家的对价值的贡献，也没有个所以然，因为艺术家写出拉不朽作品，所以他们有贡献，怎么感觉都是少点什么。

不朽的价值是怎么出现的？是艺术家在创作的时候赋予作品的？是评论家认识到之后并向大众传播而产生的？如果我们能够把这个问题说得比较清楚了，谁有贡献，谁的贡献多，就不说自明了。

这也是我为什么在我的作文中写了什么是lasting value的原因，当然啦，被你认为是对文章的论述毫无帮助，严重汗！我刚刚给大伙批文章的时候似乎又有了点想法，也许可以把我的文章丰富一下，有兴趣的话可以再看看，呵呵，是不是很贪心呢？

对了，你竟然自称姐姐？？真是无语了，我和你在差几年就要有代沟了！嘿嘿

yaoyingUID: 2249342

忘了说：
Merry Christmas！