issue144。请大家帮忙修改指教。谢谢

silentpatUID: 2513238

TOPIC: 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.
WORDS: 490          TIME: 01:02:04          DATE: 2008-7-22 18:31:36

Admirable artistic masterpieces value lastingly and provide society a precious treasure spiritually. However, there were dozens of artists who were accepted by the society long after their death thanks to the critics who appreciated their arts and introduced to the public. Then who gives the society something of lasting value, the artist or the critic? I prefer the former, the artists, those who created the masterpiece. Critics are not an essential approach to realize the value of arts. Only those who create the fantastic works really understand the exact meaning and emotion contained in the works without misunderstanding. Interestingly, sometimes criticism is creative artistically and becomes arts itself.

Critic is not a necessary introducer to artistic masterpiece all the time. Their job is to sense and justice the artistic works and to provide the public their feelings and estimation. They are generally sensitive to art evaluations and familiar with art principles. Admittedly, they provide the public a convenient approach to understanding art works and contribute a lot for the popularization. However, they are not essential. I want to cite a Buddhism clarification to make a comparison. The art works is just like the moon and the critic is like a finger. You can see the moon with the help of finger pointing at it. However, finger is not the moon and also you don't have to point the moon to see it.

The artistic works can only be clarified by the creators without any misunderstanding. If continued with the comparison above, the artists are also the moon. The art is a reflection of the life and thoughts of artists and expression of their feelings and emotion. We can try to sense their feelings and emotion from their arts, but we can not feel exactly as they ever felt, because it is impossible to replace our experience with theirs. Such impossibility extinguishes all full understanding. As long as the artist passes away, nobody else can be able to clarify the artistic works extremely accurately and everything will leave to be secrets.

However, sometimes criticism itself is also rather artistic and recreates the arts. As I mentioned above, art is kind of expression of individual feeling and emotion while criticism itself is right kind of expression of the feeling and sentiments of the critics. Although the art can not be full understood without misapprehension, the understanding itself may be more attractive than the art. More occasionally, it led to modification and recreation brought the art better evaluation. The famous Chinese novel <Shui Hu> was ever criticized and modified by Jin Shengtan, a critic in Ming Dynasty. And the modified <Shui Hu> was praised even better than the original one.

In summary, I suggest that it is the artist that gives the society artistic works of lasting value but not the critic. Because as creative artists, they are the best clarifier to the art and the introduction from the critics is somewhat not essential.

多谢哈

superjiang001UID: 2300426

Admirable artistic masterpieces value挺新颖的用法，原来没见过value做动词用 lastingly and provide society a precious treasure好像treasure不可数吧spiritually. However, there were dozens of artists who were accepted by the society long after their death thanks to the critics who appreciated their arts and introduced to the public你这里想说艺术家和鉴赏家都起了作用，但又加上了long after death, 感觉有点歧义，最好去掉. Then who gives the society something of lasting value, the artist or the critic? I prefer the former, the artists, those who created the masterpiece似乎有点多余. Critics are not an essential approach to realize the value of arts. Only those who create the fantastic works really understand the exact meaning 改成复数meanings and emotion 改成复数emotions contained in the works without misunderstanding. Interestingly, sometimes criticism is creative artistically and becomes arts itself.这个观点挺新颖的

Critic is not a necessary introducer to artistic masterpiece 似乎用了很多masterpiece,可以用点别的词代替all the time. Their job is to sense and justice the artistic works and to provide the public their feelings and estimation. estimation和feelings 顺序换一下比较好They are generally sensitive to art evaluations and familiar with art principles.art是名词 Admittedly, they provide the public a convenient approach to understanding改成understand art works and contribute a lot for the popularization.这句感觉是空话，而且和上一句话有点重复，说的都是一个意思 However, they are not essential. 长短结合挺有力度的，我也得学学I want to cite a Buddhism clarification to make a comparison. The art works is are just like the moon and the critic is like a finger. You can see the moon with the help of finger pointing at it. However, finger is not the moon and also you don't have to point the moon to see it. 明白你说的这个最后举例的意思，也许你感觉可以和下一段衔接上，但感觉不是很好的例子，你只是提出一个观点：critics的作用不是必须的： you don't have to point the moon to see it,但是你没有证明过没有critics我们也一样可以发现伟大的作品，而你下一段则说的是只有artistic能了解作品的内在价值，给我感觉有点衔接不上，呵呵

The artistic works can only be clarified by the creators without any misunderstanding. If continued with the comparison above, the artists are also the moon. The art is a reflection of the life and thoughts of artists and expression of their feelings and emotion.好几个and,前几个换成逗号吧，可以说The works of art are reflection of the authors’ life experience, thoughts, and also desires to express their feelings and passion. We can try to sense their feelings and emotion from their arts换成works, but we can not feel exactly as 加个what they ever felt, because it is impossible to replace our experience这个词感觉用的不太恰当 with theirs. Such impossibility extinguishes all full understanding. 没太懂什么意思，呵呵As long as the artist passes away, nobody else can be able to clarify the artistic works extremely accurately accurate and everything will leave to be secrets secret.

However, sometimes criticism itself is also rather去掉吧artistic and recreates the arts不能说重新创造了艺术吧. As I mentioned above, art is kind of expression of individual individual’s feeling and emotion while criticism itself is right kind of expression of the feeling and sentiments of the critics. Although the art can not be full fully understood without misapprehension, the understanding itself may be more attractive than the art. More occasionally, it led leds to modification and recreation 加个which brought the art better evaluation. The famous Chinese novel <Shui Hu> was ever criticized and modified by Jin Shengtan, a critic in Ming Dynasty. And the modified <Shui Hu> was praised even better than the original one.

In summary, I suggest that it is the artist that who gives the society artistic works of lasting value but not the critic. Because as creative artists, they are the best clarifier to the art and the introduction from the critics is somewhat not essential.

前面写得很好，后面可能是掐时间的缘故吧，感觉小错误比较多，兄弟辨证的接受吧，呵呵，有空也帮我改改吧，也是144，多谢！！！

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-860802-1-1.html