[0610同主题写作issue144]在下的GRE处女作，欢迎各位拍砖。7.26就杀G了，时间好紧迫

zbjiangUID: 201115

各位大虾和牛人有时间帮小弟改改作文，这是偶的第一篇issue。小弟7.26就杀G了，时间紧迫，希望各位能不吝赐教

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.

中文提纲：
1.艺术家创造艺术，给社会带来lasting value，给人们带来精神上的寄托和安慰

2.批评家能促进艺术的长足发展，同样给社会带来lasting value，对于观众来说，去其糟粕取其精华，可以吸引他们的注意，使得艺术家的作品能流传开来；对于artist来说用促进作用。

3.过多的，过分的批评会阻碍艺术的发展，损害社会的lasting value

One of symbols of the society's advancement is the art's advancement, to which the artist and the critic contribute themselves together. Although the author asserts that the artist has given society something of lasting value, not critic, in my opinion, the advancement of art calls for a balance between the artist and the critic, no matter what effects, positive or negative, the critic could make to art.

  No doubt that the artists have made the great and everlasting value to our society in many aspects, including the outstanding paintings that inspire people and give human hopes, the symphonies and movies that release human's ideas, meanwhile, in many fields even in religions that purify human's spirit with the artists' works. The great artist Vinci, I believe everyone knows him as his work Mona Lisa, represents the outstanding to people and his works draw the world's eyeball. With Mona Lisa's mystical smile he makes people enjoy art and his work gives the whole society the everlasting value. Besides the painting, other art works also have the great value that will be in the world for ever. They contribute greatly to the advancement of art.

  Not only the artists, but also the critics devote to the progress of art, because the critic would be activator to promote the artist works, in the other hand, the critic would be filter for human to give rid of the draffy and leave the distillate. Furthermore, the moderate critique can make the artist works being more valuable to society. As some great man has said that no critique, no progress. This sentence represents the meaning of the critic's existence.

  But just like the general rule, the extreme is bad. Over critique might strike the young artist's enthusiastic zeal and influence that the public judgments to the works that might be good become opposite to the original and right ones. Van Gogh, who created the impressionism on painting, and his works didn’t be accepted until his death. The main reason causing this result is that critics did not appreciate his works and induct the public to criticize them. But his thoughts and works are great and originality, as has been proved by being appreciated by public in latter time. As this example has indicated, this kind of critique would block the advanced paces of art and destroy the society of lasting value.

The relationship between artists and critics is just like the universal regular in the world. The phenomena that one side has more advantage than the other-too many artists’ works or criticises -is the poison of the art, and it could not bring the lasting value to society. So the society of art needs a balance between the artist and the critic.

多谢各位了

唐易UID: 195689

挺流畅的，比我强多了
我发现的就有几个小错误：１There's no doubt that(比no doubt还多几个词呢)
                                    ２ on the other hand 　（好象没in the other hand 的说）
然后，提纲中的＂对于观众来说，去其糟粕取其精华＂可以多写几句丰富内容～
最后，The phenomena that one side has more advantage than the other-too many artists’ works or criticises -is the poison of the art, and it could not bring the lasting value to society.　我水平有限，没太看懂～～～　麻烦楼主指教～　

zbjiangUID: 201115

原帖由 唐易 于 2006-7-11 12:32 发表
挺流畅的，比我强多了
我发现的就有几个小错误：１There's no doubt that(比no doubt还多几个词呢)
                                    ２ on the other hand 　（好象没in the other hand 的说）
然后，提纲 ...

The phenomena that one side has more advantage than the other-too many artists’ works or criticises -is the poison of the art, and it could not bring the lasting value to society.
这句话我主要是想说明任何一方比另一方占有优势的话，对艺术的发展都是有害的

zbjiangUID: 201115

自己又改了一下，丰富了一下第二个理由段

  One of the society's advancement symbols is the art's advancement, to which the artist and the critic contribute themselves together. Although the author asserts that the artist has given society something of lasting value, not critic, in my opinion, the advancement of art calls for a balance between the artist and the critic, no matter how positive or negative effects the critic could make.

  No doubt that the artists have made great and everlasting value to our society in many aspects, including the outstanding paintings that inspire people and give human hopes, the symphonies and movies that release human's ideas, meanwhile, the artists' works in many other fields as in religions that purify human's spirit with. The great artist Da Vinci, his famous work Mona Lisa, represents the outstanding to people and his works draw the world's eyeballs. With Mona Lisa's mystical smile he makes people enjoy art and his work gives the whole world the everlasting value. Besides the painting, other art works also have the great value that will be in the world for ever. They contribute greatly to the advancement of art.

  Not only the artists, but also the critics devote to the progress of art, because the critic would be activator to promote the artist works, in the other hand, the critic would be filter for human to give rid of the draffy and leave the distillate. The process that critics comment the art works is the process that the art works present their lasting value to society and let public understand and appreciate the lasting value. Furthermore, the moderate critique can make the artist works being proved more valuable to society. The great France sculptor Rodin said that “the world is full of the beauty unless we have a pair eyes to find it out”. The critic is just this pair eyes to find and identify the true beauty for public. The contributions that critics have made are subliming the lasting value of society and wash out the draffy.

  Admittedly, just like the general rule, the extreme is no benefit. Over critiques might strike the young artist's enthusiasm. Meanwhile because critics can influence the public judgments, it is possible to make the public generate the negative judgments to the works that is actually good. Take an example, Van Gogh, who created the impressionism on painting, but his works didn’t be accepted until his death. The main reason is that critics did not appreciate his works and induct the public to criticize them. But his thoughts and works are outstanding and innovative, as proved by being appreciated by public in latter time. As this example has indicated, this kind of critique would block the advanced paces of art and destroy the society of lasting value.

  The relationship between artists and critics is just like the universal regular in the world. The phenomena that one side has more advantage than the other-too many artists’ works or critics-is the poison of the art, and it could not bring the lasting value to society. So the society of art needs a balance between the artist and the critic.

zbjiangUID: 201115

自己顶