issue144 评论家那道高频题

我的马甲UID: 2177806

语言上比较单调，快考试了，现在能大体通顺就阿弥陀佛了。
TOPIC：ISSUE 144 - "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：593          TIME：0:44:04          DATE：2006-2-14
[限时B4没怎么写就写结尾了，修改后657]

In the field of art, artists and critics are two cardinal roles. Then, do the artists serve to give society something of lasting value, as the speaker claims? In my point of view, it is just another way around.

Admittedly, no one can deny the fact that it is the artists who create the works of art and their inherent value. The inherent value of the works of art is that the works aptly and sufficiently represent the creators' inner world rather than the outside world as a whole. According to what Freud has said art, in essence, is a kind of release of individual lust, converting the human libido into plentiful creativity. Artists set themselves apart as distinctive creators. Via the works of art, artists express their own emotions, passions or desires to the world, and such self-expression is the exact value of the works for the artists themselves. We can state that we cannot appreciate and accept certain works, yet, we have to admit these works have their owe value.

However, frequently, it is the critics who make the works have lasting value for the society, not only for the artists themselves. Just like discussed above, the buzzword of the arts is expressionism. Due to the gap between the populace and the distinctive artists, the mass often hardly comprehend what the artists really convey in their works. On the other hand, critics have professional proficiency, which can help people understand the arts. With the comments by the critics, we might feel that we are just  communicating with the artists while facing their works, and rambling into their inner world of the artists. Consider countless works of the period of Renaissance. Were it not for the comments or annotations by the critics, populace would not understand what the underlying theme of the works. In this sense, the critics, to a certain degree, may be regarded as the bridge between the masses and the artists, and without them, populace and artists would stand on two sides of a river.

Some people may argue that in history, myriads of works of art, which have won the worldwide high honor at present, were not be accepted by their contemporary people, including the critics in that era. But, I will point out that it is still the critics who make them can be comprehended by people at present. When those works firstly emerged in history, they might offend the prevailing aesthetic customs and standards of that era. Then history witnesses a fact that through gradual researching, the critics after that period reveal the true and unique ideas and thoughts of those works, and explain to the populace. The works of the Renaissance mentioned in the above paragraph can illustrate this point again. Those works in that period were non-comprehensible or accepted by people in that period, but now, with the comments and notations by critics, people at present know how to appreciate them and give them high honor. Hence, it is the critics who return those works the deserved respect.

In addition, the critics can also contribute to the development of the arts. Now that the critics are the bridge between the audience and the artists, not only they benefit the populace for the comprehension of the works, but also for the artists' creativities. The critics give the feedback to the artists, which is the real reflect of their works, including earnest and useful suggestion. Such reflect, for certain artists can help them improve their skills to create better works, and for others, may give them certain inspiration, then creating a new genre.

To sum up, the works of art are the artists' creativities and embody their inner world. Nevertheless, the role of the critics should not be ignored in that without the critics, certain works would not be accepted or appreciated by the masses. Additionally, the critics also play a paramount function in the development of arts.


补个提纲：
观点：艺术家赋予艺术作品内在价值，评论家赋予它们社会价值（反对观点）
1、艺术家创造了艺术作品并赋予它内在价值。
2、但，评论家给与它们社会价值。
3、过去不被评论家看好的而现在牛的艺术作品之所以被我们现在接受还是因为评论家。
4、评论家还对艺术的发展有帮助。

[ 本帖最后由 我的马甲 于 2006-2-14 22:16 编辑 ]

我的马甲UID: 2177806

up

leedgenUID: 160823

seat taken 今天我也写这篇，晚点来拍，表急哟

leedgenUID: 160823

In the field of art, artists and critics are two cardinal roles. Then, do the artists serve to give society something of lasting value, as the speaker claims? In my point of view, it is just another way around. [观点明确，和我的观点相反地，继续往下]

Admittedly, no one can deny the fact that it is the artists who create the works of art and their inherent value. The inherent value of the works of art is that the works aptly and sufficiently represent the creators' inner world rather than the outside world as a whole. According to what Freud has said art, in essence, is a kind of release of individual lust, converting the human libido into plentiful creativity. Artists set themselves apart as distinctive creators. Via the works of art, artists express their own emotions, passions or desires to the world, and such self-expression is the exact value of the works for the artists themselves. We can state that we cannot appreciate and accept certain works, yet, we have to admit these works have their owe value.

However, frequently, it is the critics who make the works have lasting value for the society, not only for the artists themselves. Just like discussed above, the buzzword of the arts is expressionism[看了金山词霸，expressionism为表现主义：20世纪早期艺术的一种流派，强调艺术家的内心经验的主观表达]. Due to the gap between the populace and the distinctive artists, the mass often hardly comprehend what the artists really convey in their works. On the other hand, critics have professional proficiency, which can help people understand the arts. With the comments by the critics, we might feel that we are just communicating with the artists while facing their works, and rambling into their inner world of the artists. Consider countless works of the period of Renaissance. Were it not for the comments or annotations by the critics, populace would not understand what the underlying theme of the works.[好句型，赞] In this sense, the critics, to a certain degree, may be regarded as the bridge between the masses and the artists, and without them, populace and artists would stand on two sides of a river. 评论家给艺术家和公众建起了一个桥梁

Some people may argue that in history, myriads of works of art, which have won the worldwide high honor at present, were not be accepted by their contemporary people, including the critics in that era. But, I will point out that it is still the critics who make them can be comprehended by people at present. When those works firstly emerged in history, they might offend the prevailing aesthetic customs and standards of that era. Then history witnesses a fact that through gradual researching, the critics after that period reveal the true and unique ideas and thoughts of those works, and explain to the populace. The works of the Renaissance mentioned in the above paragraph can illustrate this point again. Those works in that period were non-comprehensible or accepted by people in that period, but now, with the comments and notations by critics, people at present know how to appreciate them and give them high honor. Hence, it is the critics who return those works the deserved respect.

In addition, the critics can also contribute to the development of the arts. Now that the critics are the bridge between the audience and the artists, not only they benefit the populace for the comprehension of the works, but also for the artists' creativities. The critics give the feedback to the artists, which is the real reflect[reflection] of their works, including earnest and useful suggestion. Such reflect [reflection], for certain artists can help them improve their skills to create better works, and for others, may give them certain inspiration, then creating a new genre.

To sum up, the works of art are the artists' creativities and embody their inner world. Nevertheless, the role of the critics should not be ignored in that without the critics, certain works would not be accepted or appreciated by the masses. Additionally, the critics also play a paramount function in the development of arts.总结得很完整

这篇文章写的无可挑剔啊，佩服，句子通顺，句式变换也丰富，词汇也挺好的，分析得也很透彻，到位。

我实在该不出什么错，只有羡慕的份了

ChunyanLi2005UID: 2124266

就算你不写B4 这篇文章也相当的好啊！
语言非常顺，也没有摸版的痕迹，我看你要必胜了！