Issue144 [天道酬勤小组]第一次作业by yaoqian0424

yaoqian0424UID: 2323517

------题目------
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.
------正文------
The speaker asserts that the artists, rather than the art critics, provide something of lasting value to society. Admittedly, artists contribute greatly to creating the enduring value, however, it can not blind us the significant benefit which critic brings to society through the art works.

First of all, we have to see that artists are creators of any great art works which bring profound value to society, which means, they are the resource of art. In every time period of human history, there are always some prominent artists constantly remembered by the masses. They had unique insight to catch the instantaneous beauty of life, and then they created the amazing works of art that bring our society something of lasting value through their ingenious mind. For example, Shakespeare was considered as the greatest writer in 16th century, who has composed hundreds of attractive novels and operas with in which many moved and interesting stories were told. And the most memorable imprints for every reader were the loyal for king and the faith of love as well as the persistence on promise that have gain lasting value . So we can not afford to neglect the significant contribution the artists bring to our society.

On the other hand, the critics are of crucial importance to transmit the spirit and sense of various forms of art to public and also offer suggestions to artists for their further development in art. There is a good case in point: the musician Beethoven is so prominent for his accomplishment on music that even an 8-year boy in elementary school knows some works of him. But dose the 8-year boy really appreciate the content of his music completely. The answer is absolutely “no”. He is too young to understand the true value of Beethoven's abstruse conception hidden in his music. Obviously, it is the critics that can help the layman to understand and interpret art. they catch the real value of art by investigate the concrete forms of artists, and then use their defined evaluation to hand on the true value and beauty to people without professional treatment in art, which made the great works of art shared by large number of people rather constrain them in the mere artist circle and at the same time maximize the benefit of art.

Though the critics are indispensable to transmit the value of art to the society, they may commit counterproductive effect on art under some certain circumstance. After all, the criticisms themselves embrace the subjective evaluation of the critics which may turn out to be false. For example, Van Gogh was once assessed by many critics as the fatal failure since his abstract paintings did not conform to the rigid and stale general standards on art at that time. Hence he could only sell out one painting of his and finally died in loneliness and desperation. Form this case we can see that the critics may have negative impacts on art given the specific time periods.

However, after hundreds years since Van Gogh's death, the critics began to notice his amazing talent on art and rectified his important position in art history, from which we can see that though critics had falsely evaluated Van Gogh’s value, however his true contribution of art had endured for long and promoted even more universally after the critics have affirmed his greatness. From this case, we can access both artists and critics are conducive to bring the true value of art to our society.

In conclusion, it is reasonable to believe that artists are the resources of art and critics make the positive contribution on promote the value of art. Any society, if it aims at preserving the enduring value art, should lay balanceable emphasis on both artists and critics when taking into account their contribution on art.

求大家帮我拍拍，有怕必复