issue144 [kb9.11]第九次作业

goldzincUID: 2378390

题目：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.
字数：511          用时：2h+          日期：2007-8-24 下午 04:43:28
There is a subtle relationship between artists and critics -- artist, no matter how talented, needs critics to evaluate his work; critics, however, needs to judge artist’s work even when sometimes he has no idea how the artist created it, and for most times, such judgment will decide the value of the work. This relationship can give rise to an interesting question:" Who give the works the value, artist of critic?" In my opinion, both of them contribute to the value of an art work. It is the artist who creates it and compresses it into his work, while critics discover it and reveal it to the world.

The major job of a critic is to exploit the value inherent in an art work and explain it to the public. For the most times, the public holds the most traditional taste, and it is hard for them to understand some types of arts which are too unconventional, like avant-garde arts and post-modernism. Meanwhile, the critic know the artist better: what kind of life he leads, what kind of social background and moral status it is when the artist created his work, and therefore makes the critics easier to grasp the meaning of the work. After the comprehension of a work, the critics then translated it into a relatively easier way to for public to understand. And through the analysis of critic, ordinary people then have the chance to apprehend an abstruse and abstract art work.

Moreover, critics act like a filter between artist and public. By their professional judgment, most plain works with little art value will be filtered, and thus makes the works which is really valuable eventually be cherished and preserved by the society. Though sometimes they may also filter some great pieces which go too far beyond the times, yet the critics after them will find these mistakes and give these works a fair judgment.

Critics also have the power to expedite the artist's work through their praise or criticism. They are able to give a fairly objective and rational comment to an artist's work. The artist then can know the pros and cons of his work, and try to make a better one the next time.

However, despite critics made a great contribution to the discovery of the value of an artwork, without an artist's talent, there will not be any value at all. It is the artwork itself rather than the comment made by the critics appreciated by the public.  As I mentioned above, critic sometimes will make mistakes: underestimate the value of an artist's work or just does not pay enough attention to it as it did in the case of Van Gogh and Kafka, yet, as long as the work is a masterpiece, its value will be recognized eventually.

In sum, without the critics, the public will hardly find the true value of an artwork, but without the commitment of artists, there will not be any value in an artwork. Talking about the lasting value given to the society, they all contribute to it: the artists create it, and the critics reveal it.


写的好差呀……自己几乎一点想法都没有，非得看看别人写的提纲才能写出来……

[ 本帖最后由 goldzinc 于 2007-8-27 23:35 编辑 ]

prophetluoUID: 2240098

这个题目不好写...呃 居然还是高频 我郁闷啊
小小的建议:
Critics also have the power to expedite the artist's work through their praise or criticism. They are able to give a fairly objective and rational comment to an artist's work. The artist then can know the pros and cons of his work, and try to make a better one the next time.
这段展开下就好了 这个始说 artist 和 critic 的supplement的把...

还有就是 It is the artist who creates it and compresses it 没有表现是 传世之作 或者说是something immutable 啊

xiaotunbbUID: 2239241

There is a subtle relationship between artists and critics -- artist, no matter how talented, needs critics to evaluate his work; critics, however, needs to judge artist’s work even when sometimes he has no idea how the artist created it, and for most times, such judgment will decide the value of the work. This relationship can give rise to an interesting question:" Who give the works the value, artist of critic?" In my opinion, both of them contribute to the value of an art work. It is the artist who creates it and compresses it into his work, while critics discover it and reveal it to the world.(不是很同意art是critics 发现的)

The major job of a critic is to exploit the value inherent in an art work and explain it to the public. For the most times（most of the time）, the public holds the most traditional taste(art 也可以tradition 啊), and it is hard for them to understand some types of arts which are too unconventional, like avant-garde arts and post-modernism. Meanwhile, the critic know the artist better（critics 并不是biography writer, 为什么就说他们知道的那么清楚呢？ 他们只是评论作品的好坏而已~而且还和第一段矛盾了）: what kind of life he leads, what kind of social background and moral status it is when the artist created his work, and therefore makes（它的主语是什么？） the critics easier to grasp the meaning of the work. After the comprehension of a work, the critics then（两个连词重复了~） translated it into a relatively easier way to for public to understand. And through the analysis of critic, ordinary people then have the chance to apprehend an abstruse（高级词呵呵~） and abstract art work.

Moreover, critics act like a filter between artist and public. By their professional judgment, most plain works with little art value will be filtered, and thus makes the works which is really valuable eventually be cherished and preserved by the society. Though sometimes they may also filter some great pieces which go too far beyond the times （是要说ahead of 吗？有点读不通）, yet the critics after them will find these mistakes and give these works a fair judgment.

Critics also have the power to expedite（这个词好像用错了，我不认识但感觉不对，查下字典吧~help the progress of, 果真用的不对） the artist's work through their praise or criticism. They are able to give a fairly objective and rational comment to an artist's work. The artist then can know the pros and cons of his work, and try to make a better one the next time.

However, despite critics made a great contribution to the discovery of the value of an artwork, without an artist's talent, there will not be any value at all. It is the artwork itself rather than the comment made by the critics appreciated by the public.  As I mentioned above, critic sometimes will make mistakes: underestimate the value of an artist's work or just does not pay enough attention to it as it did in the case of Van Gogh and Kafka （是不是应该展开一下这两个例子？）, yet, as long as the work is a masterpiece, its value will be recognized eventually.

In sum, without the critics, the public will hardly find the true value of an artwork, but without the commitment of artists, there will not be any value in an artwork. Talking about the lasting value given to the society, they all contribute to it: the artists create it, and the critics reveal it.

看的出来你真的是花心思写了，我觉得最大的问题是结构，你的开头和观点明显是平衡观点，但是篇幅分布却又明显偏向critics。这个要对称才行吧~还有就是有的时候你会前后自相矛盾，我也有这个毛病，个人认为这是犯了大忌！这两点注意下其他都蛮好，下回理清思路再下笔吧~（相信你应该还是能理清的，不像我理还乱啊~）

[ 本帖最后由 xiaotunbb 于 2007-8-29 00:59 编辑 ]