Issue144 0706G同主题写作第九期

tianeUID: 2299690

比较有灵感就是语言太差，好多精彩的地方都说不出来
提纲：

首段用了个比喻
1.虽然艺术家创造了艺术，但是没有批评家的捧场他们的价值是不会发掘出来的
原因有二：1）大多说没有接受过相关教育的人缺少对那些艺术家生活作品创作时候的理解从而很难理解艺术
                2）批评家们可以给他们解释。
接着有个递进关系：批评家可以挑选出比较有价值的东西推荐给大众看从而节约他们的时间和精力，尤其是现在快节奏的生活。
2.批驳有些人说没有批评家艺术照样，而且有批评家在或许还会起反作用就像梵高和贝多芬的遭遇一样。
批驳：1）承认是当时批评家的错误
         2）假如没有当时的批评家当时的人们就能理解他们的价值么？
         3）现在我们能够理解他们的伟大还不是因为后来的批评家们发现的
         4）当时没有被批评家们理解是因为他们的作品高于了时代的欣赏力。
所以怎么着都少不了批评家

很没有新意的结尾

Is it the artist rather than the critic who gives society something of lasting value, as the speaker asserts? I safely agree that the artist gives them birth, whether they have strong life enough to be lasting valuable depends on the critic. In my point of view, I think both of the artist and the critic give society something of lasting value.

Without any doubt, the artist creates an art, however, without the critic, this art will may have no value. Art's valuable rely mainly on its ability of giving people pleasure, purifying the mind of people, providing people with energetic and reactivity. Only when people understand it, could them find its value. However, the majority of people, especially for the people with less of the education related to art, who do not know the life of the artist and the time the artist lived in, and even the situation of him when he did this work, are likely do not have the ability to realize an art's value. The critic, who understand this artist and this work well, can help the people understand the work and help the people find the value of this work and help them enjoy it. Moreover, the critic can choose the more valuable works and introduce them to the people so that they can enjoy them and save people's time and energy which would not spend on those which are less valuable, which is especially more important for the modern people living in a rapid movement world. In short, without the critic, we may hardly enjoy the valuable things.

Some one may share the belief that the critic is no use even harm to the arts, they think without any critic, people still can recognize the valuable art and moreover because of the critics' existence some marvelous artists and there works were ignored, such as Van Gogh and Beethoven with there works. Admittedly, this is the critics' faults during that time. But would Van Gogh and Beethoven and their works be regarded as high valuable by the people if there were no critic during that time? Even the critics who have accepted better education related to art could not understand their arts, let alone the common people. On the other hand, nowadays, almost every one of us knows Van Gogh was an impressionism master and Beethoven was a great musician who was adored as the watershed between the Classicism and the Romanticism. How do we know? It is still the critics; the later critics who understand them and their works and recognize their marvelous valuable in the art realm. The only difference between these critics is they belonged to different times. I think the reason why Van Gogh and Beethoven were ignored at their times is their works are far ahead of their age and their contemporaries can not understand. In short, the critic still play an important role in finding the valuable things even sometimes they made mistakes.

In sum, from what has been discussed above, we can safely draw the conclusion that both the artist and the critic give the arts lasting value; neither of them can be lacked. Without the artist, there will be no art in the world. Without the critic, people cannot recognize the real valuable art.

[ 本帖最后由 tiane 于 2007-3-9 00:35 编辑 ]

dennis1230UID: 2247126

占座

dennis1230UID: 2247126

首段用了个比喻
1.虽然艺术家创造了艺术，但是没有批评家的捧场他们的价值是不会发掘出来的
原因有二：1）大多说没有接受过相关教育的人缺少对那些艺术家生活作品创作时候的理解从而很难理解艺术
                2）批评家们可以给他们解释。
接着有个递进关系：批评家可以挑选出比较有价值的东西推荐给大众看从而节约他们的时间和精力，尤其是现在快节奏的生活。
2.批驳有些人说没有批评家艺术照样，而且有批评家在或许还会起反作用就像梵高和贝多芬的遭遇一样。
批驳：1）承认是当时批评家的错误
         2）假如没有当时的批评家当时的人们就能理解他们的价值么？
         3）现在我们能够理解他们的伟大还不是因为后来的批评家们发现的
         4）当时没有被批评家们理解是因为他们的作品高于了时代的欣赏力。
所以怎么着都少不了批评家

很没有新意的结尾

Is it the artist rather than the critic who gives society something of lasting value, as the speaker asserts? I safely[safely可以这么用吗？] agree that the artist gives them birth, whether they have strong life enough to be lasting valuable depends on the critic.这句话在这里的意思不明 In my point of view, I think both of the artist and the critic give society something of lasting value.

Without any doubt, the artist creates an art[art works], however, without the critic, this art will[去掉] may have no value. Art's valuable[应该用名词形式value] rely[relies] mainly on its ability of giving people pleasure, purifying the mind of people, providing people with energetic and reactivity. Only when people understand it, could them find its value.这里应该强调一下艺术的lasting value However, the majority of people, especially for the people with less of the education related to art, who do not know the life[说life有点不恰当吧，可以换成feature] of the artist and the time the artist lived in, and even the situation of him when he did this work, are likely do not have the ability to realize an[为什么用an？] art's value. The critic, who understand this artist [such artists]and this[their] work well, can help the people understand the works and help the people find the value of this work and help them enjoy it.[用了多次help] Moreover, the critic can choose the more valuable works and introduce them to the people so that they can enjoy them and save people's time and energy which would not spend on those which are less valuable, which is especially more important for the modern people living in a rapid movement world. In short, without the critic, we may hardly enjoy[考虑改变一下enjoy的表达] the valuable things.[为什么是hardly呢，我觉得说成‘不加选择的接受works，lead to a misguiding’更符合实际吧]

Some one[后面用了they，这里用ones比较好] may share the belief that the critic is no use even harm to the arts, they think without any critic, people still can recognize the valuable art and moreover because of the critics' existence some marvelous artists and there works were ignored, such as Van Gogh and Beethoven with there works. Admittedly, this is the critics' faults during that time. But would Van Gogh and Beethoven and their works be regarded as high valuable by the people if there were no critic during that time? Even the critics who have accepted better education related to art could not understand their arts, let alone the common people.这个论证有些牵强，LZ是基于people不能理解Beethoven's works;而且没有很好的支持论点--评论家的贡献，而是把对这种艺术作品的鉴别能力归功于时代的发展了 On the other hand, nowadays, almost every one[any] of us knows Van Gogh was an impressionism master and Beethoven was a great musician who was adored as the watershed between the Classicism and the Romanticism. How do we know? It is still the critics; the later critics who understand them and their works and recognize their marvelous valuable in the art realm. The only difference between these critics is they belonged[their belonging] to different times. I think the reason why [the reason of]Van Gogh and Beethoven were ignored at their times is their works are far ahead of their age and their contemporaries can not[cannot] understand. In short[前面有过一个in short，建议换一个别的，比如in this sense], the critic still play an important role in finding the valuable things even sometimes they made mistakes.

In sum, from what has been discussed above, we can safely draw the conclusion that both the artist and the critic give the arts lasting value; neither of them can be lacked. Without the artist, there will be no art in the world. Without the critic, people cannot recognize the real valuable art.结论有些绝对化，而且由于没有明确论证artist 创造lasting value，结尾的结论就缺少了支持

补充，看完全文发现B1，B2都是对评论家的正面描述，而较少提及artist,既然题目是对比两者，最好能够从两方面来分析。可以增加一段介绍artist。

欢迎交流:handshake