ISSUE96 第二次作业

wangchangxiaoUID: 2123968

I fundamentally agree with the statement that there are not so-called objective standards for works of arts, for a true appreciation of arts is an private activity and everyone has his own standard to judge the value of arts. Nevertheless, when it comes to the function of art critics, I think the speaker unfairly generalize the value of works of arts.
   
   Admittedly, art critics do serve to provide some standard for us to evaluate some works of arts, and it does help in some circumstances. For example, by reading critic articles about an lately novel, we can make a general judgement in how we like it, thus save a lot of time which we can otherwise use to read some other literary works more appropriate for us. Moreover, art critics, by using widely acceptable evaluating standards, can provide some useful advice for some rookies in writing.
   
    However, regarding the facts that the primary function of art critics is to serve to equip us so that we can get a more well-rounded appreciation of a certain form of arts and that everyone has his own judgement about arts; placing too much stress on finding a so-called objective standards for art works may hamper the real value of art critics by impeding their ability to understand some new art forms.
   
    History provide ample evidence for my statement. There abundant of great works first received as unacceptable by resistant audiences just because it does not fit to their evaluating standards. Beethoven's early listeners, accustomed to the predictable harmonies and melodic lengths of Haydn, in order to guard their rooted standard of what is classical music is, dismissed his symphonies as literally causing their ears to hurt, or consider the paintings of Thomas Eakins, now recognized as among the greatest in the American tradition, were rejected as intolerable by his sitters in the same reason. As the French critic Charles Baudelaire wrote in the 1840s:"The artist sees what his fellow citizens can't." thus it is unfair to depend a specious standard to judge the most great artist's works.
  
    The real appreciation of arts occurs when we encounter them. It is in the deepest emotional, visceral impact of arts on us lies the underlying value of arts. We by nature like autonomy, since we dislike anyone else to make decisions for us. We grant the license to the existence of art critics just to help us get a full understanding of art works. However, they should not misuse this power to establish some redundant evaluating standard, in the name of fulfilling their born obligations, to make our appreciation of arts even harder. Obviously, many art critics realize there no needs to find the unnecessary standards, they even deny the possibility of this standard.
  
     To sum up, I consider the essential function of art critics lies in their serving in helping us appreciating arts, not to endeavor to establish some standard to qualify the progress of arts.

[ 本帖最后由 wangchangxiao 于 2006-12-31 22:14 编辑 ]

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

I fundamentally agree with the statement that there are not so-called objective standards for works of arts, for a true appreciation of arts is an [a] private activity and everyone has his [or her] own standard [standpoint] to judge the value of arts. Nevertheless, when it comes to the function of art critics, I think the speaker unfairly generalize the value of works of arts. [哦！准备从critics的function破题]      

Admittedly, art[词性] critics do serve to provide some standard for us to evaluate some works of arts, and it does help in some circumstances. For example, by reading critic articles about an lately novel, we can make a general judgement in how we like it, thus save a lot of time which we can otherwise use to read some other literary works more appropriate for us. Moreover, artcritics, by using widely acceptable evaluating standards, can provide some useful advice for some rookies in writing.  

However, regarding the facts that the primary function of art critics is to serve to equip us so that we can get a more well-rounded appreciation of a certain form of arts and that everyone has his own judgement about arts; placing too much stress [emphasis] on finding a so-called objective standards for art works may hamper [impair] the real value of art critics by impeding their ability to understand some new art forms.       History provide ample evidence for my statement. There[？？] abundant of great works first received as unacceptable by resistant audiences just because it does not fit to their evaluating standards. Beethoven's early listeners, accustomed to the predictable[想表示哪个意思？---可预报的？平庸的] harmonies[predictably harmonious] and melodic lengths of Haydn, in order to guard their rooted[ingrained] standard of what is classical music is, dismissed his symphonies as literally causing their ears to hurt, or consider the paintings of Thomas Eakins[这个画家是谁？], now recognized as[和前面一个as 一样：不明白你想表达什么？建议改写] among the greatest in the American tradition, were rejected as[建议改写]intolerable by his sitters in the same reason. As the French critic Charles Baudelaire wrote in the 1840s:"The artist sees what his fellow citizens can't." thus it is unfair to depend a specious standard to judge the most great[greatest] artist's works.[用3个例子，但没有展开和总结，建议总结思路后改写]     

The real appreciation of arts occurs when we encounter them. It is in the deepest emotional, visceral impact of arts on us lies the underlying value of arts. We by nature like autonomy, since we dislike anyone else to make decisions for us. We grant the license to the existence of art critics just to help us get a full understanding of art works. However, they should not misuse this power to establish some redundant evaluating standard, in the name of fulfilling their born obligations, to make our appreciation of arts even harder. Obviously, many art critics realize there no needs to find the unnecessary standards, they even deny the possibility of this standard.       

To sum up, I consider the essential function of art critics lies in their serving in helping us appreciating arts, not to endeavor to establish some standard to qualify the progress of arts.

感觉你和前一篇的风格有很大变化，感觉你写得很艰难,so am I reading!

[ 本帖最后由 norman518 于 2007-1-1 11:37 编辑 ]

作文版全体版主UID: 2102351

题目
96 "Although, critics who write about the arts tend to deny the existence of any objective standards for evaluating works of art, they have a responsibility to establish standards by which works of art can be judged." 96．尽管那些评价艺术作品的批评家企图否定在评价艺术作品时任何客观标准的存在，他们还是有责任建立起一套艺术作品的评判标准。

I fundamentally agree with the statement that there are not so-called objective standards for works of arts, for 【since】a true appreciation of arts is an private activity and everyone has his own standard to judge the value of arts. Nevertheless, when it comes to the function of art critics, I think the speaker unfairly generalize the value of works of arts.
   
   Admittedly, art critics do serve to provide some standard for us to evaluate some works of arts, and it does help in some circumstances. For example, by reading critic articles about an lately 【改为new，没必要用那些看似生僻的词义，写句子的最高原则就是简洁】novel, we can make a general judgement in【on】 how we like it, thus 【插入it can】save a lot of time which we can otherwise use to read some other literary works more appropriate for us. Moreover, art critics, by using widely acceptable evaluating standards, can provide some useful advice for some rookies in writing.
   
    However, regarding the facts that the primary function of art critics is to serve to equip us so that we can get a more well-rounded appreciation of a certain form of arts and that everyone has his own judgement about arts【建议此句拆成几个简单句，长句不是这么写的，而且在这里用长句也没必要，只要能充分的表达思想即可，没必要套用长句】; placing too much stress on finding a so-called objective standards for art works may hamper the real value of art critics by impeding their ability to understand some new art forms.这里只是简单的道理论述，没有举例，论证的不够充分
   
    History provide ample 【改为：many，没必要用生疏的单词来体现自己词汇的丰富，用词要恰如其分】evidence for my statement. There 【去掉】abundant of great works first received as unacceptable by resistant audiences just because it does not fit to their evaluating standards. Beethoven's early listeners, accustomed to the predictable harmonies and melodic lengths of Haydn, in order to guard their rooted standard of what is classical music is, dismissed his symphonies as literally causing their ears to hurt, or consider the paintings of Thomas Eakins, now recognized as among the greatest in the American tradition, were rejected as intolerable by his sitters in the same reason. As the French critic Charles Baudelaire wrote in the 1840s:"The artist sees what his fellow citizens can't." thus it is unfair to depend a specious standard to judge the most great artist's works.这里只是例子的堆砌，并没有很好的分析，这是一个问题。
  
    The real appreciation of arts occurs when we encounter them. It is in the deepest emotional, visceral impact of arts on us lies the underlying value of arts. We by nature like autonomy, since we dislike anyone else to make decisions for us. We grant the license to the existence of art critics just to help us get a full understanding of art works. However, they should not misuse this power to establish some redundant evaluating standard, in the name of fulfilling their born obligations, to make our appreciation of arts even harder. Obviously, many art critics realize there no needs to find the unnecessary standards, they even deny the possibility of this standard.这段论述实在没有必要
  
     To sum up, I consider the essential function of art critics lies in their serving in helping us appreciating arts, not to endeavor to establish some standard to qualify the progress of arts.

总结：
你在反驳题目的时候论点建立的不是很好。应该从：美的本质是难以界定的，它是一种纯粹主观的艺术，从这个角度论述更好一些。