- 最后登录
- 2013-3-19
- 在线时间
- 9 小时
- 寄托币
- 583
- 声望
- 6
- 注册时间
- 2007-10-20
- 阅读权限
- 20
- 帖子
- 0
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 366
- UID
- 2415765
 
- 声望
- 6
- 寄托币
- 583
- 注册时间
- 2007-10-20
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 0
|
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: 529 TIME: 00:45:00 +30mins DATE: 2008-11-23 14:59:44
The author asserts that the artist is more meaningful because they give society something of lasting value, compared with the critic. But in my opinion, the artist and the critic are just like a pair of twins, who mutually rely on each other and both play crucial roles in the development of society.
To begin with, there is no doubt that the artist created hundreds and thousands of great art works which contain lasting value. It is because of the artist that we can get so many masterpieces which characterize our society and enrich out spiritual life. There are enough examples to support this point. It is Van Gogh who painted the "Sunflower" that showed people the sense of hope. And it is Beethoven who composed wonderful symphonies, such as Hero and Fate. And it is Shakespeare who created vivid characters of Romeo and Juliel, showing the true meaning of love. Without these outstanding artists, it is impossible for us to appreciate the lasting value of great works because they are the original headstream of the lasting value.
However, we cannot ignore the significance of the critic. In the light of conveying these lasting-value works to the society, the critic plays an indispensable role. There must be someone who has the passion and ability to bridge the gap between the artists and the public. For artists themselves, it is very difficult to achieve the lasting value. Partly because this kind of lasting value in works of art often is hidden in the deeper meaning of the words and pictures, rather than on the surface. And partly because the artists usually are so distinguished and unique that people in the same time could not understand their brand-new ideas. Take Van Gogh as an example again. His marvelous paintings have not been well recognized until he passed away. We can imagine if there had been some critics with foresight the life tragedy of Van Gogh would not happen any more. Only when the deeper meanings are understood by the public, the value can be realized and lasted.
Last but not least, the fact adds further credibility to my view that the critic is necessary for the public to select valuable works of art and teach them how to appreciate. Nowadays, more and more art works have the opportunities to spread through the TV media, Internet, etc. The impact of a large amount of information leads people not to have enough time and energy to select and discover which art works are valuable and meaningful. In this situation, the effect of critic is put in an indispensable position and the critic with professional view and academic standard is able to select and discover for the public. Besides, the public also should learn some effective methods to understand art work in depth-level.
In sum, the artist creates great works art and then the critic help to convey them to most part of the public. So there are two steps in the process through which these great words achieve lasting value. Only in this way of combination of the artist and the critic, can the great works be spread and understood efficiently and deeply.
欢迎拍砖~:-) |
|