0910AW 同主题写作第四期 ISSUE144 by cc

.C.C.UID: 2645494

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: 482          TIME: 00:34:41          DATE: 2009-6-13 14:42:29

That the speaker's assertion that only the artists give something of lasting value to society seems unfair, which ignores the critics' controbutions as well as the artists'. In my own point of view, neither of the two can be dispensed: artistic creations are made by the artists while the critics evaluate them ever deeper and more popular.

To begin with, it is true that the critics are of great importance to the art works. On the one hand, People, who are usually have no sense of art and thinking art complex and recondite. Critics evaluate works and then translate them to ever more popular statements thus those works can be tasted easily but also deeply. Consider many word famous artworks, such as Mona Lisa, which confused most people that why it is so famous just simply owning to her mysterious smile. After the explanation of the critics, they will finally understand Mona Lisa curves a woman extremely graceful indeed by every amazing delicate details including the light, which usually can never present in such sophisticated ways, which not any other artists can, and hence success to build her smile enigmatic. On the other hand, critics have the duty to list works for the purpose of representing a certain style, helping people have a better and quicker understanding of it. Heavy Metal? they may mention Led Zeppelin. Pop music? Madonna maybe the best answer. New age? It will be well illustrate by Enya or Yanni. Such representative works describe the art works thus making them ever more popular.

However, I have to concede that critics may sometimes do harm to the creativity of the artists hence affect the whole society's art works more or less. In order to get a better apprehension, some artists are more likely to carter to critics' taste. It is common to see when someone praised highly by his unprecedented work, and a lot of them are followed imaging they will be thought the same. Nevertheless, it always take no effects. Only those persist his own ideas, will they achieve in the end.

Additionally, it is the artists base the foundation of art works. Without artists, critics have nothing to evaluates, not to mention give society any value. The ancients, for instance, they create whatever they want, but the creativity of their work can never be ignored. Even there's no critics that time, but their works still stream long. What's more, sometimes critics also make mistakes slight awe-inspiring works. However, as time passes, the excellent works still shining the whole art circles. As is the cases, for example, Sydney Opera House, the Crystal Palace and so forth are all criticized badly. Finally, the former one becomes the symbolic of Sydney , even as well as Australia, while the latter stand for the burgeon of industrial design. So we should respect every art work and never declare anything is out of value due to the critics' assertive pan.

In sum, both artists and critics do dedicate in giving our society alive with lasting value. We can never ignore either of them as well as treat them fairly along with our own consideration of art.

蘅芜雪UID: 2646650

That the speaker's assertion that only the artists give something of lasting value to society seems unfair, which ignores the critics' controbutions as well as the artists'. In my own point of view, neither of the two can be dispensed: artistic creations are made by the artists while the critics evaluate them ever deeper and more popular.这句有点不顺~简洁有力的开头，我喜欢~





To begin with, it is true that the critics are of great importance to the art works. On the one hand, People, who are usually have no sense of art 有点绝对~用个比较级或者是little比较好and thinking art complex and recondite额？这句貌似有语法问题~. Critics evaluate works and then translate them to ever more popular statements thus those works can be tasted easily but also deeply. Consider many word （world）famous artworks, such as Mona Lisa, which confused most people that why it is so famous just simply owning to her mysterious smile. After the explanation of the critics, they will finally understand Mona Lisa curves a woman extremely graceful indeed by every amazing delicate details including the light, which usually can never present in such sophisticated ways, which not any other artists can, and hence success to build her smile enigmatic.囧阿囧阿，好长的句子~缩短下吧，要不然逻辑有点不清[/ On the other hand, critics have the duty to list works for the purpose of representing a certain style, helping people have a better and quicker understanding of it.color] Heavy Metal? they may mention Led Zeppelin. Pop music? Madonna maybe the best answer. New age? It will be well illustrate by Enya or Yanni. Such representative works describe the art works thus making them ever more popular.这些例子与论证有什么关系呢？





However, I have to concede that critics may sometimes do harm to the creativity of the artists hence affect the whole society's art works more or less语法还是貌似有错误. In order to get a better apprehension, some artists are more likely to carter（cater） to critics' taste. 这句很好It is common to see when someone praised highly byof his unprecedented work, and a lot of them are followed imaging they will be thought the same.语法貌似有错误 Nevertheless, it always take no effects. Only those persist his own ideas, will they achieve in the end. 把语言再书面化一些






Additionally, it is the artists base the foundation of art works. Without artists, critics have nothing to evaluates, not to mention give society any value. The ancients, for instance, they create whatever they want, but the creativity of their work can never be ignored. Even there's no critics that time, but their works still stream long. What's more, sometimes critics also make mistakes slight awe-inspiring works. However, as time passes, the excellent works still shining the whole art circles. As is the cases, for example, Sydney Opera House, the Crystal Palace and so forth are all criticized badly. Finally, the former one becomes the symbolic of Sydney , even as well as Australia, while the latter stand for the burgeon of industrial design. So we should respect every art work and never declare anything is out of value due to the critics' assertive pan.






In sum, both artists and critics do dedicate in giving our society alive with lasting value. We can never ignore either of them as well as treat them fairly along with our own consideration of art.

感觉对于你主题句的论证还不够有力。有点停留在泛泛的层面上。语言上要多多注意。结尾段太简单，还需丰满

.C.C.UID: 2645494

That the speaker's assertion that only the artists give something of lasting value to society seems unfair, which ignores the critics' controbutions as well as the artists'. In my own point of view, neither of the two can be dispensed: artistic creations are made by the artists while the critics evaluate their art works ever deeper and more popular.

To begin with, it is true that the critics are of great importance to the art works. On the one hand, the public usually have little sense of art and think art complex and recondite. Critics evaluate works and then translate them to ever more popular statements thus those works can be tasted easily but also deeply. Consider many world famous artworks, such as Mona Lisa, which confused most people that why it is so famous just simply owning to her mysterious smile. After the explanation of the critics, they will finally understand Mona Lisa curves a woman extremely graceful indeed by every amazing delicate details including the light, which can never present in such sophisticated ways, which not any other artists can, and hence success to build her smile enigmatic. On the other hand, critics have the duty to list works for the purpose of representing a certain style, helping people have a better and quicker understanding of it. Heavy Metal? they may mention Led Zeppelin. Pop music? Madonna maybe the best answer. New age? It will be well illustrate by Enya or Yanni. Such representative works describe the art works thus making them ever more popular.


However, I have to concede that critics may sometimes harm the creativity of the artists, and more or less affect the whole society's art works. In order to get a better apprehension, some artists are more likely to cater to critics' taste. It is common to see when someone is praised highly by his unprecedented work, and many artists follow him then image they will deserve the same appreciation. Nevertheless, it always take no effects. Only those persist his own ideas, will they achieve in the end.


Additionally, it is the artists base the foundation of art works. Without artists, critics have nothing to evaluates, not to mention give society any value. The ancients, for instance, they create whatever they want, but the creativity of their work can never be ignored. Even there's no critics that time, but their works still stream long. What's more, sometimes critics also make mistakes slight awe-inspiring works. However, as time passes, the excellent works still shining the whole art circles. As is the cases, for example, Sydney Opera House, the Crystal Palace and so forth are all criticized badly. Finally, the former one becomes the symbolic of Sydney , even as well as Australia, while the latter stand for the burgeon of industrial design. So we should respect every art work and never declare anything is out of value due to the critics' assertive pan.


In sum, both artists and critics do dedicate in giving our society alive with lasting value. We can never ignore either of them as well as treat them fairly along with our own consideration of art.


不知道结尾怎么丰满啊……最近一直这么写
上面那个例子我想说是critics可以把作品归类，通过代表作，人们更好的了解某个风格

lucarlUID: 2616426

这么晚了还在，共勉~

Neptune2010UID: 2626044

That the speaker's assertion that only the artists give something of lasting value to society seems unfair, which ignores the critics' contributions as well as the artists'（这里不要用as well as，会产生歧义，表示ignores both A and B）. In my own point of view, neither of the two can be dispensed: artistic creations are made by the artists while the critics evaluate their art works ever deeper and more popular.(一般比较级要有比较对象than xxx，这里没有必要比较，所以可以不用)

To begin with, it is true that the critics are of great importance to the art works. On the one hand, the public usually have little sense of art and think art complex and recondite. Critics evaluate works and then translate them to ever more （这里也没有比较的必要、、）popular statements thus those works that can be tasted easily but also deeply. Consider many world famous artworks, such as Mona Lisa, which confused most people that why it is so famous just simply owning to her mysterious smile.（这一局有点糊涂，作者是想表达confuse为什么famous，还是confuse 神秘的微笑呢？）After the explanation of the critics, they will finally understand Mona Lisa curves a woman extremely graceful indeed by every amazing delicate details including the light, which can never present in such sophisticated ways, which not any other artists can, and hence succeeds to build her smile enigmatic. On the other hand, critics have the duty to list works for the purpose of representing a certain style, helping people have a better and quicker understanding of it. Heavy Metal? they may mention Led Zeppelin. Pop music? Madonna maybe the best answer. New age? It will be well illustrate by Enya or Yanni. Such representative works describe the art works thus making them ever more popular. （这一部分有点牵强、因为没有看到价值体现在哪里，只是熟知一些名字可能不代表understanding）


However, I have to concede that critics may sometimes harm the creativity of the artists, and more or less affect the whole society's art works. In order to get a better apprehension, some artists are more likely to cater to critics' taste. It is common to see when someone is praised highly by his unprecedented work, and many artists follow him then image they will deserve the same appreciation. Nevertheless, it always takes no effects（地到得表达一般是 it always is in vain 或 it is always effortless）. Only by persisting his own ideas, will they achieve in the end.


Additionally, it is the artists who base the foundation of art works. Without artists, critics have nothing to evaluates, not to mention give society any value. The ancients, for instance, they created whatever they want, but the creativity of their work could never be ignored. Even there were no critics that time, their works still streamed long. What's more, sometimes critics also make mistakes slight ( to disparage?) awe-inspiring works. However, as time passes, the excellent works still shines the whole art circles. As is the cases, for example, Sydney Opera House, the Crystal Palace and so forth were all criticized badly at the beginning. Finally, the former one becomes the symbolic of Sydney , even as well as Australia, while the latter stand for the burgeon of industrial design. So we should respect every art work and never declare anything is out of value due to the critics' assertive pan.


In sum, both artists and critics do dedicate in giving our society alive with lasting value. We can never ignore either of them as well as treat them fairly along with our own consideration of art.