Issue144 【0706G－CRUSADE小组】第2次作业 by vanlucker

vanluckerUID：2267009

Issue144
"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.

1.      平衡观点:艺术家给社会带来永久价值,但是评论家也通过为艺术服务来给社会贡献
2.       艺术家通过作品给人们带来快乐,同时又有更深层的含义如道德等,给社会lasting value.举例Shakespeare’s Macbeth
3.       艺术评论家通过评论艺术品来将艺术家想要表达的东西直接呈现给人们,使人们更深刻了解,同样为人们与社会带来好处. 举例:Picasso’s Guernica
4.       但有时候一些用心不良的人利用艺术来伪装背离人性道德伦理等的东西.通过艺术评论家甄别来将其排除,使人们与社会免遭其害.但是有时候艺术评论可能因为局限于某时代特有判断,个人喜好,甚至是对艺术家成就的嫉妒-误导了人们与社会对该艺术品的理解.举不出例子,帮我想想好吗?
5.       总之,艺术家通过作品,评论家通过对作品的评论,为社会提供了永久财富.



    The statement asserts that the artist, not the critic, provide something of lasting value to society. Artists, through their individual works offering people distinct eyes to appreciate the contemporary society, serve to provide the lasting value to society. Art critics, at the same time, by equipping people with a straightly insight of certain artist’s works, contribute to society the otherwise value of art. In my view, the two are combined with each other to provide the real lasting value to society.
    According to the statement, there are two arguments to support my view. The first has to do with the lasting value of art. The art is perhaps originally to provide people the pleasure. The most artistic works such as paintings, novels, movies, and even architects in which people take enjoyment can provide them distinct entertainment to relax and enjoy in. Moreover, behind the original function of art, artists distinctively express their feelings to people by their works. Society would therefore benefit from the essence of this expression such as a set of moral and ethical principles, the criticism to society and the like. Consider, for example, Shakespeare’s Macbeth in which people learn that immoral even evil means of attaining one’s goal might eventually kill oneself. When people watch such moral plays, they might imagine that they were the characters on the stage, by appreciating the plot they might recognize truly themselves, and therefore might understand the moral value as a key to the moral advancement of human society.
    The second argument has to do with the art critic. While the artist give people distinct eyes to deeply see the contemporary society, the critic provide people different angles to perceive deeply art. There will always be many laypersons of a variety of art. A critic who has an insight of certain artist’s works can not help but serve to enhance layperson’s understanding and appreciation, as well as publicize the truly inner meanings of the artist's works. For example, most people might see Picasso’s Guernicaas a grotesque image due to their superficial understanding of the impressionism. By explaining comprehensibly and detailedly, critics can equip such laypersons with a distinct insight to deeply appreciate Picasso’s paintings that they might perceive his authentic passion and creative impulse of this painting about the immorality and inhumanity in World War II, and Picasso’s works were therefore appreciated more and more acceptably in society by the contemporary and the future generations. Thus, the critics serve people's understanding and appreciation, while it serves something of the lasting value of art to society as well.
    Admittedly, there will always be some deleterious works, particularly about the pornography and the violence, with the “art” mask that distortedly influent innocent people to see the true art and immorally provide a disservice to society. The critic can call people’s attention to the fact as a effective filter to eliminate the harmful works. Nevertheless, while critics filter out “the harmful art” by they judgment, it also seems questionable that the critic’s judgments might be confined by the dominative trend of his time, the individual favors, or even the jealousness to certain artists who attained the overachievement. Such disadvantages, it seems to me, just counteract little with the lasting value of the art and the critic. With the accumulation of history and culture, people will see the art more and more equally and objectively. It is the reason that why the disadvantages merely do a more and more negligible disservice to society.
    In sum, without the critic, the artist whose works people cannot be able to understand and appreciate might provide nothing, let alone something of the lasting value, to society. On the other hand, only when critics provide their criticism of certain artists’ works to people, do they contribute the otherwise lasting value of the art to society. The lasting value is a combination of the contribution of the artist and the critic.

憋死我了,找了半天资料


[ 本帖最后由 vanlucker 于 2007-2-16 21:12 编辑 ]

rose_07UID：2276843

搬张沙发过来学例子

rose_07UID：2276843

这下不仅仅是学了，还要拍，可我的砖不多，见谅啊

The statement asserts that the artist, not the critic, provide something of lasting value to society. 这里如果能加一个连词就更连贯一些了Artists, through their individual works offering people distinct eyes to appreciate the contemporary society, serve to provide the lasting value to society. Art critics, at the same time, by equipping people with a straightly straight insight of certain artist’s works, contribute to society the otherwise value of art otherwise 一般是用作连词的，感觉不太对，想了一个表达，但还是觉得不太顺口value of art in other forms . In my view, the two are combined with each other to provide the real lasting value to society.
    According to the statement, there are two arguments to support my view. The first has to do with the lasting value of art. The art is perhaps originally to provide people withthe 去掉pleasure. The去掉 most artistic works such as paintings, novels, movies, and even architects in which people take enjoymentwhich people enjoy感觉更习惯一些 can provide them with distinct entertainment to relax and enjoy inenjoy in这个词组没见过，也没有查到b?没看懂B是代表什么，the second one?感觉最好不要这么表达. Moreover, behind the original function of art, artists distinctively express their feelings to people by their works. Society would therefore benefit from the essence of this expression such as a set of moral and ethical principles, the criticism to society and the like. Consider, for example, Shakespeare’s Macbeth in which people learn that immoral even evil means of attaining one’s goal might eventually kill oneself. When people watch such moral plays, they might imagine that they were the characters on the stage, by appreciating the plot they might recognize truly themselves, and therefore might understand the moral value as a key to the moral advancement of human society.最后这一句语有两个主谓宾结构
    The second argument has to do with the art critic. While the artist give people distinct eyes distinct eyes 感觉这个表达还是有点问题的to deeplydeep see the contemporary society, the critic provide people different angles to perceive deeply artdeep. There will always be many laypersons门外汉是laymen of a variety of 去掉 art. A critic who has an insight of certain artist’s works can not help but serve to enhance layperson’s understanding and appreciation, as well as publicize the truly inner meanings of the artist's works. For example, most people might see Picasso’s Guernica　as a grotesque image due to their superficial understanding of the impressionism. By explaining comprehensibly and detailed, critics can equip such laypersonslaymen with a distinct insight to deeply appreciate Picasso’s paintings that不明白这个是引导的什么句 theywho? might perceive his authentic passion and creative impulse of this painting about the immorality and inhumanity in World War II, and Picasso’s works were therefore appreciated become more and more acceptably in society by the contemporary and the future generations. Thus, the critics serve people's understanding and appreciation, while it serves they serve something of the lasting value of art to society as well.
分成两方面来论述想法挺好的，但是开头一句是最能反应这一段论述重点的，觉得直接用the first has sth to do with有些生硬，如果能概述一下本段的论述会好些
    Admittedly, there will always be some deleterious works, particularly about the pornography and the violence, with the “art” mask that distortedly influent innocent people to see the true art and immorally provide a disservice to society. The critic can call people’s attention call attention这个搭配好像有点问题to the fact as an effective filter to eliminate the harmful works. Nevertheless, while critics filter out “the harmful art” by they judgment, it also seems questionable that the critic’s judgments might be confined by the dominative trend of his time, the individual favors, or even the jealousness to certain artists who attained the overachievement. Such disadvantages, it seems to me, just counteract little with the lasting value of the art and the critic. With the accumulation of history and culture, people will see the art more and more equally and objectively. It is the reason that why the disadvantages merely do a more and more negligible disservice to society.
个人觉得题目中的艺术应该是指真正的艺术家吧，如果想到一些伪艺术，似乎有点牵强
    In sum, without the critic, the artist whose works people cannot be able to understand and appreciate might provide nothing, let alone something of the lasting value, to society. On the other hand, only when critics provide their criticism of certain artists’ works to people, do they contribute the otherwise lasting value of the art to society. The lasting value is a combination of the contribution of the artist and the critic.

[ 本帖最后由 rose_07 于 2007-2-16 23:47 编辑 ]

vanluckerUID：2267009

恩,谢谢JJ
明天改正