Issue144 [AERO_ASSIGN12][GOLDENSTRIKE]

GoldenStrikeUID: 2437012

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, painting, etc.

Issue Answer:

The statement presented above consisted of two independ assertions. While the author concludes that artists created works of lasting value for the society, she denys the value of critics' work. Although I am entirely agree about the recognition of artists' work, the contribution of critics to our society should not be overlooked, to my point view.

There was a debate over whether artist provide works of fact value, like other specilists such as engineers, who build useful machines that function everyday to facilitate production procedure, continuously provide high-quality goods for human living. However, such a dispute was always ends with a conclusion that, although artwork would not directly enhance our domestic production, it would directly give the auidence an impressive, cheerful enjoyment and thus promote people's psychology conditions, which would always be one of the ultima aim of mass production: to make better lives for human beings. Artwork provided by great artists would invoke certain emotions on viewer's mind, and thus provide a impressive, enjoyable experience which would hardly be substitude by any industrial products. The machines, tools and instruments could breakdown after a period of usage, but the aesthetic impact of great artworks would never fade.

The value of critic, on the other hand, lies in some other aspects which cannot be fully appreciated by only focus on artwork. First, critics introduce artworks, and gives fine analysis and interpretations of certain obscure pieces of work. Without reading the book remarks on newspaper, we cannot select which novel to read from those hills of books in bookstores. But more importantly, the mechanism of critize give chances to let every society members get involved in creating larger value of certain artwork. In every historical period, artist always constitude a small fraction of the whole society, but by discuss, evaluate and criticise professional artists' work, common person got the opptuinity to fulfill the realistic significance of famous paintings, musics or novels. In my country, there were certain controversial novels, once published, triggered a large dispute over adolescent crimination, and hence drived the legislation on this certain issue. New laws on youth criminate was certainly not pushed by that very author of the novel; indeedly, it was those critics, amateurish or professional, who promoted the better law to be done in a relatively short period.

The author's negative atitude towards critic, however, is understandable in a modern context. In such a world where mass media spreads out millions of articles critisizing various artworks, it's plausible that a large fraction of them does not stand for valuable issues. Nevertheless, this was another evidence that it is the critizing provide the platform for any citizens post their argument on certain work, and the problem with critizing is not with whether all of they are meanless, but with how we leverage advanced information techonolgy to distill the vaule out of those large amont of remark articles.

In sum, both artist and critic offered our society valuable works of lasting value. The artist provide outstanding artworks, while the critisizing reveals value to these pieces of work, while granted possibility for normal person to post their own ideas of art, usually related to their own social experience, and thus added practical meaning to those masterpieces. Only by these two paralleled aesthetic procedure -- creating and critisizing of artwork -- both taken place, would art fully develope its lasting value for human society.

[ 本帖最后由 GoldenStrike 于 2008-2-8 22:47 编辑 ]

liruixinsnakeUID: 2373729

The statement presented above consisted of two independ assertions. While the author concludes that artists created works of lasting value for the society, she denys the value of critics' work. Although I am entirely agree about the recognition of artists' work, the contribution of critics to our society should not be overlooked, to my point view.
(分析题目，并提出 critic同样有贡献 的观点)

There was a debate over whether artist provide works of fact value, like other specilists such as engineers, who build useful machines that function everyday to facilitate production procedure, continuously provide high-quality goods for human living. However, such a dispute was always ends with a conclusion that, although artwork would not directly enhance our domestic production, it would directly give the auidence an impressive, cheerful enjoyment and thus promote people's psychology conditions, which would always be one of the ultima aim of mass production: to make better lives for human beings. Artwork provided by great artists would invoke certain emotions on viewer's mind, and thus provide a impressive, enjoyable experience which would hardly be substitude by any industrial products. The machines, tools and instruments could breakdown after a period of usage, but the aesthetic impact of great artworks would never fade.
（artist虽然不能创造直接的价值，但简洁的给社会贡献持久价值）

The value of critic, on the other hand, lies in some other aspects which cannot be fully appreciated by only focus on artwork. First, critics introduce artworks, and gives fine analysis and interpretations of certain obscure pieces of work. Without reading the book remarks on newspaper, we cannot select which novel to read from those hills of books in bookstores. But more importantly, the mechanism of critize give chances to let every society members get involved in creating larger value of certain artwork. In every historical period, artist always constitude a small fraction of the whole society, but by discuss, evaluate and criticise professional artists' work, common person got the opptuinity to fulfill the realistic significance of famous paintings, musics or novels. In my country, there were certain controversial novels, once published, triggered a large dispute over adolescent crimination, and hence drived the legislation on this certain issue. New laws on youth criminate was certainly not pushed by that very author of the novel; indeedly, it was those critics, amateurish or professional, who promoted the better law to be done in a relatively short period.

（紫色为段落结构句）  
(本段说明critic的作用，两点)

The author's negative atitude towards critic, however, is understandable in a modern context. In such a world where mass media spreads out millions of articles critisizing various artworks, it's plausible that a large fraction of them does not stand for valuable issues.
Nevertheless, this was another evidence that it is the critizing provide the platform for any citizens post their argument on certain work, and the problem with critizing is not with whether all of they are meanless, but with how we leverage advanced information techonolgy to distill the vaule out of those large amont of remark articles.
（进一步说明critic的作用） criticizing 全文都拼错了

In sum, both artist and critic offered our society valuable works of lasting value. The artist provide outstanding artworks, while the critisizing reveals value to these pieces of work, while granted possibility for normal person to post their own ideas of art, usually related to their own social experience, and thus added practical meaning to those masterpieces. Only by these two paralleled aesthetic procedure -- creating and critisizing of artwork -- both taken place, would art fully develope its lasting value for human society.

（最终 以平衡观点结尾）


段落结构比较清晰，用词丰富，句式变化也比较不错
打字错的比较多 虽不影响阅读，但恐怕难逃电子判错，还有待提高

bigyanUID: 2382427

The statement presented above consisted of two independ (independent) assertions. While the author concludes that artists created works of lasting value for the society, she denys the value of critics' work. Although I am(去掉) entirely agree about the recognition of artists' work, the contribution of critics to our society should not be overlooked, to my point view（my point 就行了吧）.

There was a debate over whether artist provide works of fact value, like other specilists such as engineers, who build useful machines that function everyday to facilitate production procedure, continuously provide high-quality goods for human living. However, such a dispute was always ends with a conclusion that, although artwork would not directly enhance our domestic production, it would directly give the auidence an impressive, cheerful enjoyment and thus promote people's psychology conditions, which would always be one of the ultima(ultimate) aim of mass production: to make better lives for human beings. Artwork provided by great artists would invoke certain emotions on viewer's mind, and thus provide a impressive, enjoyable experience which would hardly be substitude(substituted) by any industrial products. The machines, tools and instruments could breakdown after a period of usage, but the aesthetic impact of great artworks would never fade. (好句子)

The value of critic, on the other hand, lies in some other aspects which cannot be fully appreciated by only focus on artwork. First, critics introduce artworks, and gives fine analysis and interpretations of certain obscure pieces of work. Without reading the book remarks on newspaper, we cannot select which novel to read from those hills of books in bookstores. But more importantly, the mechanism of critize give chances to let every society members get involved in creating larger value of certain artwork. In every historical period, artist always constitude(单三) a small fraction of the whole society, but by discuss, evaluate and criticise professional artists' work, common person got the opptuinity to fulfill the realistic significance of famous paintings, musics or novels. In my country, there were certain controversial novels, once published, triggered a large dispute over adolescent crimination, and hence drived （过去时用错了）the legislation on this certain issue. New laws on youth criminate was certainly not pushed by that very author of the novel; indeedly, it was those critics, amateurish or professional, who promoted the better law to be done in a relatively short period.（好例子呀）

The author's negative atitude towards critic, however, is understandable in a modern context. In such a world where mass media spreads out millions of articles critisizing various artworks, it's plausible that a large fraction of them does not stand for valuable issues. Nevertheless, this was another evidence that it is the critizing provide the platform for any citizens post their argument on certain work, and the problem with critizing is not with whether all of they are meanless, but with how we leverage advanced information techonolgy to distill the vaule out of those large amont of remark articles.(好句子)

In sum, both artist and critic offered our society valuable works of lasting value. The artist provide outstanding artworks, while the critisizing reveals value to these pieces of work, while granted possibility for normal person to post their own ideas of art, usually related to their own social experience, and thus added practical meaning to those masterpieces. Only by these two paralleled aesthetic procedure -- creating and critisizing of artwork -- both taken place, would art fully develope its lasting value for human society.
论证的很充分，好句子和好例子不断。不过应该注意拼写，开始我还一个一个的改，后来发现太多了，不好意思……尤其是时态和动词名词化。