同主题写作issue144【艺术家和批评家的爱恨情仇】

血喑UID: 2603208

144 "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. "
是艺术家而不是批评家，带给社会一些具有持久价值的东西。*批评家指经常评价艺术作品，例如小说、电影、音乐、绘画等的人。
19:18-20:18
words:626
     What thing will last for a long time in human history in the realm of art? It is clear that everything people admire, nomatter which centruy they belonged to, is those greatest works created by the significant aritists. Even though almost all of them are followed by the cistique given by several, sometimes nearty every, critics and sometimes are contemped by them. But as time goes by, these works are mentioned by the next generation of critics and thought to be the valuable for the wohle society.
     For instance, paintings which go against convention would often be criticed as meaningless at the early time of their borth. Paintings created by the painters, who have a profound mind and predictable eyes, will always reflect the trend of the history and thus resist to be absorbed by tradition, are often underestimated. Monet, the most remarked delegate of the Impressionism, once exhibited his painting Olympia in a gallery of Pairs and obtained untold critique from both the critics and ordinary people. They thought his painting lack of decency and the naked woman who looked at the audiences directly in it was licentious. They asserted the painting stained the atmosphere of the society. However, many years after its first appearance, the painting abstain an unprecedenced praise from the paople who were despited it before. And now, Olympia, represented the trendency from classical form to modern type, is thought to be one of the most important works of the Impressionism and the whole history of human art.
      As literature, many vital novels suffered the same fate as paintings above. Novels, not like music or paintings, contain more details and are more near to the populace and the society, ofetn misunderstood and obtain unfair critique. For example, a controversial novel named Lolita, written by a Russian novelist in the early time of the 20th century, was claimed to be a immoral work and the witer was defined as foul. The U.S, Britain, Russia and even France which were noted as publish freedom refused to print this novel and the first publication was censored and constrainted by the government. Nervethless, the society acquired that the topic of the novel is beyond the ability of understanding of the world at that period of time and critics and general public all advocated it as a profound work and one of the most greatest novel in the 20th century.
      Through the analysis above, we can see that the value of the arts is lasting while the critics are inconsistent. The works given by former stand the test of time, but the latter often have a bigger influence in a short time and change follwed the pulse and trend of the whole society. So can we say that it is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value immediately? No. The creating of a everlasting work does not only depend on the artist himself or herself, but also includes the citics. Ordinary people who are lack of censitive of beauty and expertize to preciate them deeply usually follow the citique of authority. In other word, a valuable work of art is judged by the critics. Once the critics learn the work's value, they change their early critique and turn to admire it. Therefore the world will know that the work is great and if the critique last long, it will creats a lasting value of art work.
      To sum, the artist and the critist often cooperate to promote a art work as an enternal one and sometimes the latter cannot cautch up with the former and give a wrong citique. However, they two finally accomplish the job together to put a great work to to the society which defined as having lasting value.

seiranzcc1UID: 2514067

What thing will last for a long time in human history in the realm of art? It is clear that everything people admire, nomatter which centruy they belonged to, is those greatest works created by the significant aritists. Even though almost all of them are followed by the cistique given by several, sometimes nearty every, critics and sometimes are contemped by them. But as time goes by, these works are mentioned by the next generation of critics and thought to be the valuable for the wohle society.开头很明确，点出论点
     For instance, paintings which go against convention would often be criticed as meaningless at the early time of their borth. Paintings created by the painters, who have a profound mind and predictable eyes, will always reflect the trend of the history and thus resist to be absorbed by tradition, are often underestimated. Monet, the most remarked delegate of the Impressionism, once exhibited his painting Olympia in a gallery of Pairs and obtained untold critique from both the critics and ordinary people. They thought his painting lack of (lack可以及物好像)decency and the naked woman who looked at the audiences directly in it was licentious. They asserted the painting stained the atmosphere of the society. However, many years after its first appearance, the painting abstain an unprecedenced praise from the paople who were despited it before. And now, Olympia, represented the trendency from classical form to modern type, is thought to be one of the most important works of the Impressionism and the whole history of human art.
      As literature, many vital novels suffered the same fate as paintings above. Novels, not like music or paintings, contain more details and are more near(near可以这样用么？我对用词都不太在行) to the populace and the society, ofetn misunderstood and obtain unfair critique. For example, a controversial novel named Lolita, written by a Russian novelist in the early time of the 20th century, was claimed to be a immoral work and the witer was defined as foul. The U.S, Britain, Russia and even France which were noted as publish freedom refused to print this novel and the first publication was censored and constrainted by the government. Nervethless, the society acquired that the topic of the novel is beyond the ability of understanding of the world at that period of time and critics and general public all advocated it as a profound work and one of the most greatest novel in the 20th century.
这两段是要证明艺术家创造长久价值而非评论家，因为艺术家的作品可以经受住时间考验是么？例子都没有问题，但我读下来貌似主题并不是很突出，可能是我水平有限，但是我读到下面那段是才猛然意识到是在讲这个主题，对于评论家创造的“价值”也没有太提，是不是在表达上要更明确一点？
      Through the analysis above, we can see that the value of the arts is lasting while the critics are inconsistent. The works given by former stand the test of time, but the latter often have a bigger influence in a short time and change follwed the pulse（？） and trend of the whole society. So can we say that it is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value immediately? No. The creating of a everlasting work does not only depend on the artist himself or herself, but also includes the citics. Ordinary people who are lack of censitive of beauty and expertize to preciate them deeply usually follow the citique of authority. In other word, a valuable work of art is judged by the critics. Once the critics learn the work's value, they change their early critique and turn to admire it. Therefore the world will know that the work is great and if the critique last long, it will creats a lasting value of art work.
      To sum, the artist and the critist often cooperate to promote a art work as an enternal one and sometimes the latter cannot cautch(catch) up with the former and give a wrong citique. However, they two finally accomplish the job together to put a great work to to the society which defined as having lasting value.
我和作者不是一个水平了，我写这文花了一天多才憋出来，而且写的143，所以改的地方不知道是不是有价值，更多是抱着学习的态度看的。。。