issue144 [0710G 戴三个表冲刺小组] 第10次作业

nifeiUID: 2340954

144
"It is the artist, not the critic,* who gives society somethingof lasting value."

*a person who evaluates works of art, such as novels, films, music, paintings,etc.
TOPIC: ISSUE144 - "It is the artist, not the critic,* who gives societysomething of lasting value."

*aperson who evaluates works of art, such as novels, films, music, paintings,etc.
WORDS:465          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2007-8-7 16:25:20

Istrongly agree with the speaker that the works of the artists are morecherishable than the words of the critics, although the contrary view mightdisplay the functions the critics have on art, including to help understandingand to introduce the works and feedback to the artists.
Admittedly,the critics, who evaluate the paintings, novels, films, music, etc, have on artmany a function, including helping people to understand the works, filteringthem and reflect to the artists. First, they explain the works of art in acritical way to the layers, such as the main topics of the paintings or theinternal meanings of the novels, and help common people to appreciate them.Second, hundreds of thousands new works are created everyday, and we cannoteven glimpse all of them at all. The critics and their evaluations is like afilter which shows us the works most worth appreciating in their opinion.Third, they put forward suggestions about how to improve the works to theartists.
However,all the functions that critics might have are superficial when it comes to theessence of the art and when we consider real story in this field. On the onehand, about the function of explaining the works, I would like to say, theteachers and  professors who teach thetheory of this art and art appreciating of course are more professional thanthe critics and able to explain the works more clearly, since to do these aretheir work. Moreover, the essence of the art is to be understood andappreciated by the heart, other than the head, of a person. The criticalarticles, which evaluate the works in a rational way, may distract us from appreciatingthe works' objective.
Onthe other hand, the function of filtering the works seems not to be soreliable. The critics do get rid of some works which are a waste of time andenergy, but also neglect some valuable works and we might never see thembecause of the critics. For example, the works of Van Gogh, none of which wassold out before the death of this artist, and the compositions of Beethoven,which were called "chaos" at that moment. Nevertheless thecontribution of introducing, the flaw of concealing of good works cannot beacceptable.
Finally,that the feedback to the artists helps to improve the works and art is moreabsurd than the two functions above. In the art history, I can see fewforgettable works which were created because of the suggestions of critics. Onthe contrary, the instances such as the novels of Durex.M come into mindsimmediately. Her articles were evaluated to be "hard to understand"and "having no topic" at first and the novelist now is one of thebest artists