issue144 七月最高频哦

bnugirlUID: 2103958

Issue144  第6篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：144分14秒     294 words
从2005年7月3日21时49分到2005年7月4日0时144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------
I strongly agree with the contention that the artist gives something of lasting value to the society while the critic does not. Although the critic can help us understand the art works, it is of little use in achieving the aesthetic goal of the arts or may be counterproductive sometimes.

   As an existing vocation in the society, the critic seems to play some role in the art world. First, the critic has deeper understanding and more familiar with certain artist’s works. After the critic analysis and depict the inner story and meaning of a art work, we can judge and appreciate its aesthetic value. Second, the critic can direct our art appreciating activities by the means of evaluate the works. The critic serves as a filter, selects the best ones for us and deposits others .Third, the critic can give the critical feedbacks to the artist and influence their creation. In this way, the artist could produce more great works later.

   However, after we study and analysis the function of the arts and the relationship between the art and critic thoroughly, we will found that the foregoing these seemly important functions are just the attractive pretext of the critics. Turning to the first function, the real value of a great work can be appreciated by us when we see it at the first sight. It is a shock of both vision and emotion. We may not know the deeper meaning or the background of it, but we can feel the spirit and the struggling vitality of works such as David sculpted by Michelangelo, and it is the essential things for the value of an art work. The critic will mislead our intuitions and undermine our evaluation of the artworks.

    Turning to the second function that the critic recommends the works he thinks good and filters out those 'bad' ones. Admittedly, we will save a lot of time and money from not needing to search for the valuable ones from a dozens of works. However, the selection based on the critic's own hobby and aesthetic perspective risk of cutting the throat of some great works not fit for the critic's taste. Because of the critic's interaction, the creative work- Impression: Soleil Levant painted by impressionism Claude Monet was widely attacked to be eccentric; And because of the critic's selection, the fortune of the great work -Sunflower made by Van Gogh was even dramatic, it received no praise and no blame during his life time. Since the critic's judgment is always limited by his own understandings and the time he lived in, we cannot expect the critic would make a fair evaluation toward every works, so the second function of the critic is dubious.

      Turning next to the third function that the artist can improve his work referring to the artist's advice, it is most unfounded. Great works are often produce accord to the artist's impulsion and inspiration, they represents the artist's psychological state and personal experience or understanding that time. Every art work is not replaceable because of this feature. Consider if Monet accepted the critic's advice that time, his paintings would not be a representative work of the Impressionism, and they could only be called viable craft, not art works any more.

      In sum, the critics actually plays no important role or even be counterproductive  in the evaluation of the arts, let alone of giving society something of lasting value. It is the artist who endows their works with the spirit, courage and imagination that enables these works become characteristic and valuable to society continually.

hectorUID: 2106679

issue144 七月最高频哦

Issue144  第6篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：144分14秒     294 words
从2005年7月3日21时49分到2005年7月4日0时144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------
I strongly agree with the contention that the artist gives something of lasting value to the society while the critic does not. Although the critic can help us understand the art works, it is of little use in achieving the aesthetic goal of the arts or may be counterproductive sometimes.表明观点+下文论述概要    呵呵，不知道为什么，版上的文章风格很多都很简洁，直接亮观点+一句阐述

   As an existing vocation in the society, the critic seems to play some role in the art world. First, the critic has deeper understanding and more familiar with certain artist’s works. After the critic analysis and depict the inner story and meaning of a art work, we can judge and appreciate its aesthetic value. Second, the critic can direct our art appreciating activities by the means of evaluate（evaluating） the works. The critic serves as a filter, selects the best ones for us and deposits（deserts？？） others .Third, the critic can give the critical feedbacks to the artist and influence their creation. In this way, the artist could produce more great works later.先说critics的三个优点（总结得挺好的）

   However, after we study and analysis the function of the arts and the relationship between the art and critic thoroughly, we will found（find） that the foregoing these seemly important functions（foregoing functions, seemly important,???） are just the attractive pretext of the critics. Turning to the first function, the real value of a great work can be appreciated by us when we see it at the first sight. It is a shock of both vision and emotion. We may not know the deeper meaning or the background of it, but we can feel the spirit and the struggling vitality of works such as David sculpted by Michelangelo, and it is the essential things for the value of an art work. The critic will mislead our intuitions and undermine our evaluation of the artworks.

    Turning to the second function that the critic recommends the works he thinks good and filters out those 'bad' ones. (是用turning to么？还是turn to?)Admittedly, we will save a lot of time and money from not needing to search for the valuable ones from a dozens of works. However, the selection based on the critic's own hobby and aesthetic perspective risk of cutting the throat of some great works not fit for the critic's taste. Because of the critic's interaction, the creative work- Impression: Soleil Levant painted by impressionism Claude Monet was widely attacked to be eccentric; And because of the critic's selection, the fortune of the great work -Sunflower made by Van Gogh was even dramatic, it received no praise and no blame during his life time. Since the critic's judgment is always limited by his own understandings and the time he lived in, we cannot expect the critic would make a fair evaluation toward every works, so the second function of the critic is dubious.

      Turning next to the third function that the artist can improve his work referring to the artist's advice, it is most unfounded. Great works are often produce (produced)accord(according) to the artist's impulsion and inspiration, they represents the artist's psychological state and personal experience or understanding that time. Every art work is not replaceable because of this feature. Consider if Monet accepted the critic's advice that time, his paintings would not be a representative work of the Impressionism, and they could only be called viable craft, not art works any more.
以上三段分别驳斥三个优点
      In sum, the critics actually plays no important role or even be counterproductive  in the evaluation of the arts, let alone of giving society something of lasting value. It is the artist who endows their works with the spirit, courage and imagination that enables these works become characteristic and valuable to society continually.  
总体结构清晰，用词很好，举例也很丰富恰当（admire），艺术类能写成这样很赞
不过似乎有一些语法错误，我也就粗略地看了看，不知道对不对。

hectorUID: 2106679

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... type%26typeid%3D101
我写的比较烂，请指教！