issue144 为我所用小组第九次作业

guoshishuoUID: 2467577

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: 547         TIME: 01:00:00          DATE: 2008-4-2 16:32:44

According to the author, the artist leaves lasting value to society while the critic does not. However, I consider that they are both indispensable and cannot live without each other.
To begin with, it is true that the masterpieces artists have created are of great value. For instance, the Summer Palace and the Great Wall in Beijing, whose magnificence have astounded tourists from all over the world; the Star Night by Monet whose beauty has attracted people for hundreds of years. And the stories imagined by Shakespeare have made so many readers be absorbed. Great changes have taken place during the centuries while those works of art still maintain their values and become our culture treasures just like red wine whose fragrance turns more tempting as time goes by. We can not survive without the works of art. They are signs of history which remind us what was going on long before we have been born. They have rooted in our culture and enriched our mind. They are essential to our lives.
However, these values may be not discovered by ordinary people if critics do not exist. Because lots of people cannot easily understand the works of arts, we need critics to provide us with a direction. They are like those who select diamonds from stones and sands, bring them back and burnish them to show the lusters of the diamonds which have been hidden behind their surfaces. Perhaps those diamonds are no different from stones in ordinary people's eyes, but when they have been burnished, people will view them as expensive treasures. That's why critics are needed to select the ones that really glitter from numerous works of art. Because they are professional and command better appreciation ability for art, they can serve as those who burnish the diamonds and help ordinary people enjoy works of art more easily.
What's more, critics can also give advice to artists on their works and the respond from ordinary people. Because many artists are absorbed in their own worlds and perhaps not clear of what people have commented on their works. If there is any deficiency in the works, critics will be able to remind the artists to make their works better. But I concede that under some circumstances, current critics cannot understand the works and probably make some improper comments on them. Van Gogh's works may be served as a good example because they were not appreciated by others until a quite long time after he had passed away. Works of art is a kind of expression of artists' minds, and therefore each piece of artistic work contains the shadow of the artist. If critics have no common experience with artists or if they have no clear picture of artists' thoughts, no matter how professional they are, they are not able to appreciate the works either. Consequently, when under these kinds of conditions, artists do not need to pay too much attention on the comments of the critics' who can not understand their inner world.
In conclusion, it is the great works that provide critics with opportunities to utilize their appreciation abilities while it is also because of the existence of critics that the works of arts are able to be under the masses' attention. They live on each other and are both valuable existences to the society.

小猪sisiUID: 2453484

文章思路清晰，结构合理

但是对于最后一段，我认为 在讨论完有些情况不需要 听不合理的评论家的意见
最后是不是还需要做一个总结？
感觉段落没有主题句

我要上学UID: 2476030

------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：45分4秒     640 words
从2008年3月4日21时2分到2008年3月4日21时45分
------题目------
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.
------正文------
In this statement, the speaker claims that a lasting value of society lies solely in its artistic achievements than criticism of arts, which involved unfair judgments toward criticism and arts themselves. Nevertheless, complex as this statement itself, several points from my knowledge need to be presented, and on balance I agree with this claim.

A threshold problem in this statement is that arts and criticism are inseparable integrity, which cannot simply be categorized as two contradictories. Careful scrutiny on how a piece of artistic work becomes a remarkable masterpiece and later on exerting a lasting influence on a community, we will find out a process: when a new creation or a new talent emerges, both positive and negative critics appears, more often, the later might be more vocal. Then, this new talent or creation is widely recognized by public, where most people tend to express their own ideas about it. Sooner or later, this new work becomes famous and passes from the older generations, and later generations will show their fond of which to show that they have a new taste different from their fathers. In other words, the artist and the critic are more often combined as team players for a whole lasting value than that as it claimed in the statement.

When it comes to a broad horizon, in terms of cultural, economic and historical development, I would like to choose artists who have greater impact on society. Consider notable figures such as French artist Monet, whom few would disagree is that he was accused by critics of its eccentric skills exerting on painting cloth, to some extent he with his famous "Impression, sunrise" challenged people's aesthetic value beyond his contemporary critics. Another compelling example of this point has to do with choreography, Ms. Duncan were one of greatest artists in US history, for her contributions to freedom style of a dancer. In the scope of modern architecture in our country, gifted "starchitects" are profitable from critics they received, namely Frank Grehry, amazed by his warped masterpiece Guggenheim Museum in Spain and Disney Park Office in L.A. , It is strange that the more acute critics he received, the more support he will received. As a matter of fact, such instances might defy enumeration, but this should be sufficed to illustrate.

In other words, through the eye from Monet, people throughout the world know better about water lilies in Giverny, France, which attracts millions of tourists visit there. Unconsciously, French culture has been cultivated in people's heart.  As I mentioned above, Ms. Duncan with her beautiful dance, political problems were easily tackled by her dance diplomatic. Last but not least, there is no doubt the as Frank Grehry's architectures being accused by a waste of materials, he was nominated as American's most influential leaders by US news, while his buildings have the most frequent exposures to the magazines and TV shows, which stand for a milestone for post modernization in history.

In many ways the work of critics is easy, they risk very little. They appreciate what offered by artists and sell their own judgments. They thrive in negative criticism, which is fun to write and read. But the bitter truth for critics they must face is to be insightful and rational, for the case that an average piece of junk work is probably much more meaningful than criticism fathomed. Nevertheless, for a long time, the world is often unkind toward new talents and new creations. Therefore it is critics' job to discover and defense the new.

To sum up, on balance, I agree with this statement and assure that arts have more lasting value of society. There is no deny that without critics, the artistic works are unfathomable to public for its hidden ideas and impulses of society; without artists the world is colorless, soundless and hopeless.