Issue 144@@A DREAM @@小组第二次作业 by kren_crazy

kren_crazyUID: 2623887

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. "


Artist and critic are both the important role in any society. However, which one of them makes better contributions to the lasting value of the society? In any case, the answer given by the topic is opinionated.

Generally speaking, arts is the reflection of daily life and also expresses the artists' individual view or feelings about the society which the artists lived in while critic as the topic described functions to evaluate the arts. Artist as individual of the society, their feelings are various thus makes the issue complexity.

Arts itself is neutral but it closely related to the artist attitudes towards life and can be classified into categories: the positive one and the negative one. Negative arts may be expressed in hatred, aggressive and inhuman way while positive one is expressed in philanthropic, harmonious and human way. Good arts is the creation of artists and it is required their imagination. Artists in positive type use their own perspectives to describe the society or the nature and make the rest of the world self-con and be levelheaded. R

However, some of artists who produce vulgar novels, films and paintings are "moral criminals" to our society. The recent startled growth of the cases of juvenile pregnancy and juvenile crime is partly attributed by them. On this point of view, the role of critics acts like the filter against negative arts. If we take arts in the society as the mixture of rice,
soybean and tiny sand. The function of the critics is to filter the sand and keeps the rice and soybean from being spoiled. Fortunately, in China it seems to win the battle against the vulgar arts. Critics fiercely condemn and urgently propose to ban the activities of spreading the licentious films or any other forms of vulgar arts. As a result, it keeps people especially juvenile who lack controls of themselves from "the trash in arts". Obviously, without the persuading and justice of the critics the society or our generations will go ruined by the "trash art", let alone the lasting value of it.

On the other hand, the understanding power of critics in some cases may gap significantly with talent artists. The critics who usually represent the common sense and hold the value of populace unintentionally fail certain progress to the society. "People tend to stay still when encountering new ideas", someone has said. Take the famous artist van Gogh as example, today he is honored as one of the most talent painter in history. However, when he was alive he is penniless because the value of his works was not acknowledged at that time, but now his style of postimpressionism has influenced the realm of painting profoundly as well as our attitudes toward arts.

As a result, either artist or critic alone could give society something of lasting value in certain circumstances. However, without supporting each other complimentarily or even acting opposite, both of them are quite difficult to leave something of value for the society.

zdcforeverUID: 2641750

Artist and critic are both the important role in any society. (Artists and critics both are important roles in any society)However, which one(one 去掉) of them makes better（改成more是不是好些） contributions to the lasting value of the society? In any case, the answer given by the topic is opinionated（固执己见？）.

Generally speaking, arts（art） is the reflection of daily life and also expresses the artists' individual view or feelings（view和feel单复数一致） about the society which the artists lived in while critic as the topic described functions to（去掉） evaluate the arts. Artist as individual of the society, their feelings are various thus makes the issue complexity（有些唐突，可放下一段中）.

Arts itself is neutral but it closely related to the artist attitudes towards life and can be classified into categories: the positive one and the negative one. Negative arts may be expressed in hatred, aggressive and inhuman way while positive one is expressed in philanthropic, harmonious and human way. Good arts is the creation of artists and it is required their imagination. Artists in positive type use their own perspectives to describe the society or the nature and make the rest of the world self-con and be levelheaded. R（和论述无多大关系）

However, some of artists who produce vulgar novels, films and paintings are "moral criminals" to our society. The recent startled growth of the cases of juvenile pregnancy and juvenile crime is partly attributed by them. On this point of view, the role of critics acts like the filter against negative arts. If we take arts in the society as the mixture of rice, soybean and tiny sand. The function of the critics is to filter the sand and keeps the rice and soybean from being spoiled. Fortunately, in China it seems to win the battle against the vulgar arts. Critics fiercely condemn and urgently propose to ban the activities of spreading the licentious films or any other forms of vulgar arts. As a result, it keeps people especially juvenile who lack controls of themselves from "the trash in arts". Obviously, without the persuading and justice of the critics the society or our generations will go ruined by the "trash art", let alone the lasting value of it.

On the other hand, the understanding power of critics in some cases may gap significantly with talent artists. The critics who usually represent the common sense and hold the value of populace unintentionally fail certain progress to the society. "People tend to stay still when encountering new ideas", someone has said. Take the famous artist van Gogh as example, today he is honored as one of the most talent painter in history. However, when he was alive he is penniless because the value of his works was not acknowledged at that time, but now his style of postimpressionism has influenced the realm of painting profoundly as well as our attitudes toward arts.

As a result, either artist or critic alone could give society something of lasting value in certain circumstances. However, without supporting each other complimentarily or even acting opposite, both of them are quite difficult to leave something of value for the society.

还是觉得应该把更多的经历放在题干分析与逻辑上，这道题的一个关键点是产生了lasting value，而在文中的论述很是不足，而且对critic的一些理解也不大合适，这篇文章有些小跑题

nicoleqUID: 2626973

Artist and critic are both the important role in any society. However, which one（one去掉） of them makes better contributions to the lasting value of the society? In any case, the answer given by the topic is opinionated.

Generally speaking, arts is（单复数）the reflection of daily life and also expresses the artists' individual view or feelings about the society which the artists lived in while critic as the topic described functions to evaluate the arts. Artist as individual of the society, their feelings are various thus makes the issue complexity. （第二句没大有用哦）
Arts itself（单复数）is neutral but it closely related to the artist attitudes towards life and can be classified into categories: the positive one and the negative one. Negative arts may be expressed in hatred, aggressive and inhuman way while positive one is expressed in philanthropic, harmonious and human way. Good arts is the creation of artists and it is required their imagination（这句话貌似与前后无关）. Artists in positive type use their own perspectives to describe the society or the nature and make the rest of the world self-con （self collected？） and be levelheaded. （本段的中心是最后一句？然后呢·~缺乏论证哦）

However, some of artists who produce vulgar novels, films and paintings are "moral criminals" to our society. The recent startled growth of the cases of juvenile pregnancy and juvenile crime is partly attributed by them. On this point of view, the role of critics acts like the filter against negative arts. If we take arts in the society as the mixture of rice, soybean and tiny sand（碎片。。到这里不是一句完整的话，后面是，号，标点不要乱用哦）. The function of the critics is to filter the sand and keeps the rice and soybean from being spoiled. Fortunately, in China it seems to win the battle against the vulgar arts. Critics fiercely condemn and urgently propose to ban the activities of spreading the licentious films or any other forms of vulgar arts. As a result, it keeps people especially juvenile who lack controls of themselves from "the trash in arts". Obviously, without the persuading and justice of the critics the society or our generations will go ruined by the "trash art", let alone the lasting value of it（it指代什么哦·~请指教）.
On the other hand, the understanding power of critics in some cases may gap significantly with talent artists. The critics who usually represent the common sense and hold the value of populace unintentionally fail certain progress to the society. "People tend to stay still when encountering new ideas", someone has said. Take the famous artist van Gogh as example, today he is honored as one of the most talent painter in history. However, when he was alive he is penniless because the value of his works was not acknowledged at that time, but now his style of postimpressionism has influenced the realm of painting profoundly as well as our attitudes toward arts.
As a result, either artist or critic alone could give society something of lasting value in certain circumstances. However, without supporting each other complimentarily or even acting opposite, both of them are quite difficult to leave something of value for the society.结尾不错，赞下