issue144 【7\8\9\10】第四次作业

lisheng19881108UID: 2358622

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.

When asked about whether the artist or the critic gives society something of lasting value.，people may find it hard to come to consensus due to their different experience and view.  Some people think that it is the critic who makes more contributions on lasting value. While others think that the artist should we put much emphasis on. From my perspective, I call for a balance that not only the artist but also the critic gives society something of lasting value and they are just like there two sides to every icon.

On one hand, no one can deny that the artist does many contributions to our society and many of them give the society lasting value. For instance, musician Beethoven composed a large number of articles but he was not a critic; Vinci painted the picture Mona Lisa but he seldom criticizes others’ paintings; Shakespeare wrote plenty of operas but he hardly gave comments on other operas. From this, we know this significant works and its eternal values are brought forth by artists.

On the other hand, we also should take the function of the critic seriously. Critics give a lot of comments and suggestions which help artists to create value. Artists usually need comments on their works too. Just like a student need a teacher to criticize his or her homework. A critic can tell how to seek for the valuable topics that reflect the people’s life, how to write a novel interesting and attractive to readers, how to compose a tune which is influencing, and also how to make a movie moving. In addition, Critics are like a mirror which let artists know what are the merits and demerits of their works. Without this mirror, it is possible that artists are puzzled with how to creative priceless works or go extremes of their own opinion rigidly. In this case, artists are difficult to give people lasting value, so we know the affection of critic on lasting value is also very huge.

What's more, the combination of the artist and the critics may have a deeper and lasting affection to our society. We can not make sure that every individual in society has the acute insight about the deep meaning of some art. At this sense, the critic often plays an important role to explain the article and ordinary people can understand and sympathize. In this way, the deeper meaning of article can affect the society. Professor Wang, highly respected and well-known professor at China Academy of Social Science, once point out (and I paraphrase) that when the artist and the critic all do their best to some article, the article can show its largest affection and our society will have a lasting value." So we know, If we want our society have lasting value, not only artist but also critic should we need.

To sum up, due to the aforementioned reasons, which sometimes intertwine to form an organic whole and thus become more persuasive than any single of them, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that not only the artist but also the critic gives society something of lasting value.

zhuzhuorUID: 2452739

When asked about whether the artist or the critic gives society something of lasting value, people may find it hard to come to consensus due to their different experience and view(复数).  Some people think that it is the critic who makes more contributions on lasting value. While others think that the artist should we put much emphasis on. From my perspective, I call for a balance that not only the artist but also the critic gives society something of lasting value and they are just like there two sides to every icon(coin).

On one hand, no one can deny that the artist does many contributions to our society and many of them give the society lasting value. For instance, musician Beethoven composed a large number of articles but he was not a critic(俺的观点和你冲突...具体详见我的文章的最后一个论点...); Vinci painted the picture Mona Lisa but he seldom criticizes others’ paintings; Shakespeare wrote plenty of operas but he hardly gave comments on other operas. From this, we know this significant works and its eternal values are brought forth by artists.

On the other hand, we also should take the function of the critic seriously. Critics give a lot of comments and suggestions which help artists to create value. Artists usually need comments on their works too. Just like a student need a teacher to criticize his or her homework. A critic can tell how to seek for the valuable topics that reflect the people’s life, how to write a novel interesting and attractive to readers, how to compose a tune which is influencing, and also how to make a movie moving. In addition, Critics are like a mirror which let artists know what are the merits and demerits of their works. Without this mirror, it is possible that artists are puzzled with how to creative priceless works or go extremes of their own opinion rigidly. In this case, artists are difficult to give people lasting value, so we know the affection of critic on lasting value is also very huge.

What's more, the combination of the artist and the critics may have a deeper and lasting affection to our society. We can not make sure that every individual in society has the acute insight about the deep meaning of some art. At this sense, the critic often plays an important role to explain the article and ordinary people can understand and sympathize. In this way, the deeper meaning of article can affect the society. Professor Wang, (one of? 呵呵)highly respected and well-known professor at China Academy of Social Science, once point out (and I paraphrase) that when the artist and the critic all do their best to some article, the article can show its largest affection and our society will have a lasting value." So we know, If we want our society have lasting value, not only artist but also critic should we need.

To sum up, due to the aforementioned reasons, which sometimes intertwine to form an organic whole and thus become more persuasive than any single of them, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that not only the artist but also the critic gives society something of lasting value.

大家的论点展开和语言都这么好...泪奔

tsayUID: 2492916

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.

When asked about whether the artist or the critic gives society something of lasting value.，people may find it hard to come to consensus due to their different experienceS and viewS.  Some people think that it is the critic who makes more contributions on lasting value. While others think that the artist should we put much emphasis on. 不知道这句什么意思呢 From my perspective, I call for a balance that not only the artist but also the critic gives society something of lasting value and they are just like there two sides to every icon.

On one hand, no one can deny that the artist does many contributions to our society and many of them give the society lasting value. For instance, musician Beethoven composed a large number of articles but he was not a critic; Vinci painted the picture Mona Lisa but he seldom criticizes others’ paintings; Shakespeare wrote plenty of operas but he hardly gave comments on other operas. From this, we know this significant works and its eternal values are brought forth by artists. 证明好像不是那么好

On the other hand, we also should take the function of the critic seriously. Critics give a lot of comments and suggestions which help artists to create value. Artists usually need comments on their works too. Just like a student need a teacher to criticize his or her homework. A critic can tell how to seek for the valuable topics that reflect the people’s life, how to write a novel interesting and attractive to readers, how to compose a tune which is influencing用的不好, and also how to make a movie moving. In addition, Critics are like a mirror which let artists know what are the merits and demerits of their works. Without this mirror, it is possible that artists are puzzled with how to creative priceless works or go extremes of their own opinion rigidly. In this case, artists are difficult to give people lasting value, so we know the affection of critic on lasting value is also very huge.（这个huge好像用的有问题 还有这段意思感觉有点乱 ）

What's more, the combination of the artist and the critics may have a deeper and lasting affection to our society. We can not make sure that every individual in society has the acute insight about the deep meaning of some art. At this sense, the critic often plays an important role to explain the article and ordinary people can understand and sympathize.（没看懂） In this way, the deeper meaning of article can affect the society. Professor Wang, highly respected and well-known professor at China Academy of Social Science, once point out (and I paraphrase) that when the artist and the critic all do their best to some article, the article can show its largest affection and our society will have a lasting value." So we know, If we want our society have lasting value, not only artist but also critic should we need.（这个王教授的例子是不是太那个。。。了）

To sum up, due to the aforementioned reasons, which sometimes intertwine to form an organic whole and thus become more persuasive than any single of them,（这个模版是不是忒长了 哪里找来的啊？？？呵呵） we may safely arrive at the conclusion that not only the artist but also the critic gives society something of lasting value.

1全文的思路不是特别的紧凑 证明比较散 （当然我做的不比你好）
2 词语有些用的不太好 不太准（当然可能比我的好多了 呵呵）
3 如果能在45内完成 还是算不错的了