〓DIES IN FLAMS〓 Issue190 by jessicalulu

jessicaluluUID: 2471730

issue190  "As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—when one considers all the potential uses of such money."

The issue asserts that the use of public resources for supporting the arts is unjustified to the society where some people go without food, jobs and basic survival skills. But in my opinion, the author overlooks certain economic and other societal benefits that accrue when government assumes an active role in supporting the arts.


Admittedly, arts need is not fundamental one. Cultural enrichment pales in its importance in comparison to that of food, clothing, and shelter. It is reasonable to advocate that priority should be given to indigent and needful people rather than to arts. Which does a starving person prefer, a good painting or a good meal? I concede that when it comes to social problems, priority should be given to the poor. But is it really possible to eliminate unemployment and hunger by neglecting public arts funds? Thus we should realize that it is almost impossible to eradicate hungry, unemployment from society. Take the example of all the developed countries today; even though they have the entire ideal infrastructure, unemployment still exists in these countries. What’s more, it is impossible to postpone public arts funding forever, unless we someday can live in a socialist society, which, seems to be a fantasy too.

Firstly, the benefits of public arts funding is not only support persons who visits big museums or art galleries just for entertainment. Actually, by allocating public resources to the arts, a lot of jobs for artists and those whose bread and butter depend on cultural activities, even cultural associated jobs. In other words, we actually solve problems such as unemployment, poverty and basic human needs to some extent. Consider Canada’s film industry, which is heavily subsidized by Canadian Government, provides millions of job opportunities for film industry workers. Canadian government also provide various incentives for American production companies to find and produce their movies in Canada, thus sparking a boon for the Canadian economy, thereby stimulating job growth and wealth that in turn, can be applied on education, job training and other social programs. This example of Canada proves that the public support for arts serves to deal with social problems.

Secondly, judging from the ultimate objectives and inherent function of art, one might find art, serves to provide inspirations, to lift up human spirits and put us more in touch with our feelings, foibles, and fate in short our humanity. With a heightened sensitivity to the human condition, we become more other-oriented, less self-centered, and more giving of ourselves. In other words, we become a more harmonious society, as a result of that, more persons are willing to give to those less fortunate. But if without the arts, we are just slaves of society doing jobs that really don't interest us, but have to be done. Arts are the gateway to the real culture of the world, and without them, nobody would be unique, just a bunch of hollow souls. Art gives the courage to the disappointed people, take the pleasure to tired and spiritless people, and light up faith, hope and love to the whole society. And the result is that, society gets a positive feedback and takes step into a benign circulation. And the social problems may be solved relatively easily.

To conclude, it is widely admitted that primary objective of the public resources should be to eradicate hungry, and unemployment. But, I believe that public support for arts should not be neglected because artistic activities provide much more various benefits than what we anticipate.

ddcmj519UID: 176326

（我的风格已经开始走极端了。。评的可能偏激。。jessi见谅啊~）

The issue asserts 我个人讨厌这样的开头。。感觉一上来就把灵活的写作风格扼杀了。。that the use of public resources for supporting the arts is unjustified to the society where some people go without food, jobs and basic survival skills. But in my opinion, the author overlooks certain economic and other social benefits that accrue when government assumes an active role in supporting the arts.重复了题目+指出了问题，第一句重复主题很不讨好，不能说明问题。第二句貌似overlook用的不太对？
这个。。个人体会。。看了某篇文以后导致我批改作文的时候经常对着关键句反问一个，“so what？” 事实上我觉得这个开头就是没啥内容，写了很多字，“so what？”


Admittedly, arts need is not fundamental one. 范围不明，范围都不给定就说人家不基础。Cultural enrichment pales in its importance in comparison to that of food, clothing, and shelter. It is reasonable to advocate that priority should be given to indigent and needful people rather than to arts. Which does a starving person prefer, a good painting or a good meal? I concede that when it comes to social problems, priority should be given to the poor. But is it really possible to eliminate unemployment and hunger by neglecting public arts funds? Thus we should realize that it is almost impossible to eradicate hungry, unemployment from society. idea 大爆炸。一句话一个idea，所以中心就模糊了，中文和英文表达的差异哇，我看eco的时候就发现老米是一个idea用一段话，咱就是一个idea一段话，这样的结果就是显得思路混乱，没有说服力。Take the example of all the developed countries today; even though they have the entire ideal infrastructure, unemployment still exists in these countries. What’s more, it is impossible to postpone public arts funding forever, unless we someday can live in a socialist society, which, seems to be a fantasy too.看完这句话的时候期待后面说下why impossible的。结果米。。。然后发现后面有三大段。。这个。。加个过度句？

Firstly, the benefits of public arts funding is not only support persons who visits big museums or art galleries just for entertainment. mark 一下，和一个政府要不要审查展馆展品的题目有联系。Actually, by allocating public resources 事实上我个人觉得这题是说public money的，因为题目的最后一句话，when considers... money ... usage ... to the arts, a lot of jobs for artists and those whose bread and butter depend on cultural activities, even cultural associated jobs. In other words, we actually solve problems such as unemployment, poverty and basic human needs to some extent. Consider Canada’s film industry, which is heavily subsidized by Canadian Government, provides millions of job opportunities for film industry workers. Canadian government also provide various incentives for American production companies to find and produce their movies in Canada, thus sparking a boon for the Canadian economy, thereby stimulating job growth and wealth that in turn, can be applied on education, job training and other social programs. This example of Canada proves that the public support for arts serves to deal with social problems. 赞一个，这个例子相当赞~

Secondly, judging from the ultimate objectives and inherent function of art, one might find art, serves to provide inspirations, to lift up human spirits and put us more in touch with our feelings, foibles, and fate in short our humanity.小不同意，电影 can be simply for recreation。 With a heightened sensitivity to the human condition, we become more other-oriented, less self-centered, and more giving of ourselves. In other words, we become a more harmonious society, as a result of that, more persons are willing to give to those less fortunate. 太理想话了吧~ But if without the arts直接偏题不提供公共资源！=不要art , we are just slaves of society doing jobs that really don't interest us, but have to be done. Arts are the gateway to the real culture of the world, and without them, nobody would be unique唯心主义错误, just a bunch of hollow souls. Art gives the courage to the disappointed people, take the pleasure to tired and spiritless people, and light up faith, hope and love to the whole society. And the result is that, society gets a positive feedback and takes step into a benign circulation. And the social problems may be solved relatively easily. 其实这个问题我也一直没想清楚，art到底有什么用，为什么我们要花那么大力气保护将要消失的他们，从需求金子塔看来似乎只有上层人士才会去享受？but in fact 很多文化都是社会地层发家的。我很疑惑，所以我写的时候就避实就虚了。有空一起探讨下吧。

To conclude, it is widely admitted that primary objective of the public resources should be to eradicate hungry, and unemployment. But, I believe that public support for arts should not be neglected because artistic activities provide much more various benefits than what we anticipate.这个结尾段没做到总结嘛。。抽象概念还是很多。。

jessicaluluUID: 2471730

The issue asserts 我个人讨厌这样的开头。。感觉一上来就把灵活的写作风格扼杀了。。that the use of public resources for supporting the arts is unjustified to the society where some people go without food, jobs and basic survival skills. But in my opinion, the author overlooks certain economic and other social benefits that accrue when government assumes an active role in supporting the arts.重复了题目+指出了问题，第一句重复主题很不讨好，不能说明问题。第二句貌似overlook用的不太对？ 这个。。个人体会。。看了某篇文以后导致我批改作文的时候经常对着关键句反问一个，“so what？” 事实上我觉得这个开头就是没啥内容，写了很多字，“so what？” Admittedly, arts need is not fundamental one. 范围不明，范围都不给定就说人家不基础。Cultural enrichment pales in its importance in comparison to that of food, clothing, and shelter. It is reasonable to advocate that priority should be given to indigent and needful people rather than to arts. Which does a starving person prefer, a good painting or a good meal? I concede that when it comes to social problems, priority should be given to the poor. But is it really possible to eliminate unemployment and hunger by neglecting public arts funds? Thus we should realize that it is almost impossible to eradicate hungry, unemployment from society. idea 大爆炸。一句话一个idea，所以中心就模糊了，中文和英文表达的差异哇，我看eco的时候就发现老米是一个idea用一段话，咱就是一个idea一段话，这样的结果就是显得思路混乱，没有说服力。Take the example of all the developed countries today; even though they have the entire ideal infrastructure, unemployment still exists in these countries. What’s more, it is impossible to postpone public arts funding forever, unless we someday can live in a socialist society, which, seems to be a fantasy too.看完这句话的时候期待后面说下why impossible的。结果米。。。然后发现后面有三大段。。这个。。加个过度句？ Firstly, the benefits of public arts funding is not only support persons who visits big museums or art galleries just for entertainment. mark 一下，和一个政府要不要审查展馆展品的题目有联系。Actually, by allocating public resources 事实上我个人觉得这题是说public money的，因为题目的最后一句话，when considers... money ... usage ... to the arts, a lot of jobs for artists and those whose bread and butter depend on cultural activities, even cultural associated jobs. In other words, we actually solve problems such as unemployment, poverty and basic human needs to some extent. Consider Canada’s film industry, which is heavily subsidized by Canadian Government, provides millions of job opportunities for film industry workers. Canadian government also provide various incentives for American production companies to find and produce their movies in Canada, thus sparking a boon for the Canadian economy, thereby stimulating job growth and wealth that in turn, can be applied on education, job training and other social programs. This example of Canada proves that the public support for arts serves to deal with social problems. 赞一个，这个例子相当赞~ Secondly, judging from the ultimate objectives and inherent function of art, one might find art, serves to provide inspirations, to lift up human spirits and put us more in touch with our feelings, foibles, and fate in short our humanity.小不同意，电影 can be simply for recreation。 With a heightened sensitivity to the human condition, we become more other-oriented, less self-centered, and more giving of ourselves. In other words, we become a more harmonious society, as a result of that, more persons are willing to give to those less fortunate. 太理想话了吧~ But if without the arts直接偏题不提供公共资源！=不要art , we are just slaves of society doing jobs that really don't interest us, but have to be done. Arts are the gateway to the real culture of the world, and without them, nobody would be unique唯心主义错误, just a bunch of hollow souls. Art gives the courage to the disappointed people, take the pleasure to tired and spiritless people, and light up faith, hope and love to the whole society. And the result is that, society gets a positive feedback and takes step into a benign circulation. And the social problems may be solved relatively easily. 其实这个问题我也一直没想清楚，art到底有什么用，为什么我们要花那么大力气保护将要消失的他们，从需求金子塔看来似乎只有上层人士才会去享受？but in fact 很多文化都是社会地层发家的。我很疑惑，所以我写的时候就避实就虚了。有空一起探讨下吧。 To conclude, it is widely admitted that primary objective of the public resources should be to eradicate hungry, and unemployment. But, I believe that public support for arts should not be neglected because artistic activities provide much more various benefits than what we anticipate.这个结尾段没做到总结嘛。。抽象概念还是很多。。

回ddcmj：
1、我对开头和结尾该咋个写，确实没有一个明确的概念。。。你果真一语中的啊。。。没话说所以凑字数。。。你看如果开头这样加一句会不会好一点：Can series of social problems be solved by minifing the investment on arts? The answer maybe just the opposite.
2、“我看eco的时候就发现老米是一个idea用一段话，咱就是一个idea一段话，这样的结果就是显得思路混乱，没有说服力”cmj是想说，我是一个idea一句话哇？
3、“其实这个问题我也一直没想清楚，art到底有什么用，为什么我们要花那么大力气保护将要消失的他们，从需求金子塔看来似乎只有上层人士才会去享受？but in fact 很多文化都是社会地层发家的。我很疑惑，所以我写的时候就避实就虚了。有空一起探讨下吧。”
写的时候我还是没能避免掉假大空，虽然想的时候想极力避免的。自个儿夸大了art的益处哈~确实值得商榷~

谢谢cmj，受益匪浅~

刚刚好UID: 2599482

The issue asserts that the use of public resources for supporting the arts is unjustified to the society where some people go without food, jobs and basic survival skills.But in my opinion, the author overlooks certain economic and other societal benefits that accrue when government assumes an active role in supporting the arts.
思路很清晰，文章紧紧围绕着economic and other societal benefits展开


Admittedly, arts need is not fundamental one感觉这句话没有其他TS说的明白. Cultural enrichment pales in its importance in comparison to that of food, clothing, and shelter. It is reasonable to advocate that priority should be given to indigent and needful people rather than to arts. 这两句写得很棒！是不是有对应关系？之间加个因果关系连词会不会有助于理解？Which does a starving person prefer, a good painting or a good meal? I concede that when it comes to social problems, priority should be given to the poor. But is it really possible to eliminate unemployment and hunger by neglecting public arts funds? Thus这个词我不知道在这里用好不好，前一句是问句，好像有点思维跳跃了 we should realize that it is almost impossible to eradicate hungry, unemployment from society. Take the example of all the developed countries today; even though they have the entire ideal infrastructure, unemployment still exists in these countries. What’s more, it is impossible to postpone public arts funding forever, unless we someday can live in a socialist society, which, seems to be a fantasy too.
我写的那篇作文有一段也想表达这个意思，可是给我自己感觉就是没有写完，看了你写的后受到了启发

Firstly, the benefits of public arts funding is not only support persons who visits big museums or art galleries just for entertainment. Actually, by allocating public resources to the arts, a lot of jobs for artists and those whose bread and butter depend on cultural activities, even cultural associated jobs. In other words, we actually solve problems such as unemployment, poverty and basic human needs to some extent. Consider Canada’s film industry, which is heavily subsidized by Canadian Government, provides millions of job opportunities for film industry workers. Canadian government also provide various incentives for American production companies to find and produce their movies in Canada, thus sparking a boon高频度的用到了红包词 for the Canadian economy, thereby这个用个递进怎么样？ stimulating job growth and wealth that in turn, can be applied on education, job training and other social programs. This example of Canada proves that the public support for arts serves to deal with social problems.最后一句的总结不错！例子也很好~

Secondly, judging from the ultimate objectives and inherent function of art, one might find art, serves to provide inspirations, to lift up human spirits and put us more in touch with our feelings, foibles, and fate in short our humanity. With a heightened sensitivity to the human condition, we become more other-oriented, less self-centered, and more giving of ourselves. In other words, we become a more harmonious society, as a result of that, more persons are willing to give to those less fortunate. But if without the arts, we are just slaves of society doing jobs that really don't interest us, but have to be done. Arts are the gateway to the real culture of the world, and without them, nobody would be unique, just a bunch of hollow souls. Art gives the courage to the disappointed people, take the pleasure to tired and spiritless people, and light up faith, hope and love to the whole society.这句话很漂亮And the result is that, society gets a positive feedback and takes step into a benign circulation. And the social problems may be solved relatively easily.
这段是想说艺术带来精神层面上的好处吧，给我感觉略显浮夸，可以举一个例子，例如在某时期的某个伟大作品给普通的群众带来了什么启迪。语言很生动，出现的排比句很值得学习

To conclude, it is widely admitted that primary objective of the public resources should be to eradicate hungry, and unemployment. But, I believe that public support for arts should not be neglected because artistic activities provide much more various benefits than what we anticipate.


由于我自己对文章构思掌握的不怎么样，所以只能在一些细小处表达一些个人看法。还有你对我文章的修改对我帮助蛮大的，下次写作文前咱还得好好BS一下哈

ddcmj519UID: 176326

1、我对开头和结尾该咋个写，确实没有一个明确的概念。。。你果真一语中的啊。。。没话说所以凑字数。。。你看如果开头这样加一句会不会好一点：Can series of social problems be solved by minifing the investment on arts? The answer maybe just the opposite.
2、“我看eco的时候就发现老米是一个idea用一段话，咱就是一个idea一段话，这样的结果就是显得思路混乱，没有说服力”cmj是想说，我是一个idea一句话哇？
3、“其实这个问题我也一直没想清楚，art到底有什么用，为什么我们要花那么大力气保护将要消失的他们，从需求金子塔看来似乎只有上层人士才会去享受？but in fact 很多文化都是社会地层发家的。我很疑惑，所以我写的时候就避实就虚了。有空一起探讨下吧。”
写的时候我还是没能避免掉假大空，虽然想的时候想极力避免的。自个儿夸大了art的益处哈~确实值得商榷~

1.慢慢来，开头的事儿的话，很费功夫的。其实eco的开头方法对咱很有启发的。
那句句型上多样了，但是一个句子还是需要结合整个段落才能出彩~

2.额，对。

3.写的时候一定要贴近common sense 这样才具有普遍说服力~