issue144 寄托4人组 8月21日 痛苦的一篇

meautoUID：2116250

Issue144 It is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value.
提纲：立场：都没有创造~~
1，        艺术家创造了的价值分两种来看
一种是非常正式的艺术，比如宗教的建筑，统治者的画像
这种艺术的价值，类似与历史资料，反映了当时的社会形态，价值观等等，
对于现在的社会，用处不大
另一种是非正式的艺术，如各个时期艺术家的个人作品
可能我们会对其中的部分艺术品有很高的评价，但是这种价值是否LASTING，值得怀疑，毕竟后人的看法，我们不得而知
2评论家创造了LASTING VALUE TO SOCIETY？
在评论作品，不管是好的，还是坏的，都建立了一套评价事物的标准，而这种看待普通事物的标准，有可能随时间流传下来。

好象正文第2段和第3段写的有点矛盾。。汗
Artists or critics, who give society something of external value? Although for artists this issue should be reexamined case by case, critics also make their contributions to society, contrary to what the speaker asserts

To begin with, to evaluate artists we need a close scrutiny of their artistic works. Among diverse forms of art, such as painting, sculpture, literature, or dancing, there are broadly two kinds of works of art: formal and informal art. For formal art, exemplified by religious paintings and architectures, they serve more as historical materials than purely art works. After all, the originality condensed in formal art has been reduced to minimum because they are “created” for certain purposes, and usually with certain methods. No matter Reims Cathedral in France, or St. Paul’s Cathedral with Italian style, for instance, all are built for religious activities and ceremonies. What is more important, they convey specific religious beliefs to the populace. Similar is the case of portrait for leaders and historical movements, otherwise directed to communicate political views. In this light, as long as there exist people appealed to religion, or politics, the value of artist will be continually recognized as display prestige, or beliefs through their formal works.

However, when comes to informal art, the result may be uncertain. To the extent that individual art is, by definition, product of originality and self expression, people’s judgment towards them may differ, sway, and even reverse form time to time. Plum in the Golden Vase, for example, has long been treated as pornography in China since the first day of its existence in Ming dynasty. Only until recently does the novel been recognized for its skilled implicitness reflecting social darkness at that time. While individual works of art remains immutable, people of various times may hold different attitudes upon them: people’s distinct standards, criterion, value systems due to different social environments counts. In this light, when we deem Beethoven’s Destine and Van Gogh’s the Starry Night as worthless masterpieces, our next generation may think they are rubbish. However, if generally there is no lasting standard upon which to make judgment, it is absurd to assert that, anything, including art here, is of lasting value to society.

Then consider the achievement of critics, who is closely associated with artists. Equipped with profound knowledge of the history of art and familiarity of the artists, critics evaluate works of art by comparison and analysis, inform and educate the public. Admittedly, our history is teeming with talented artists who failed into obscurity during their times, and more often than not, it is the critics who to blame, for their misjudgment impede career of artists. But critics as a whole give society a standard by evaluating art works. For example, by criticizing literature with anti-war themes, such as The Sun Also Rises, War and Peace, critics penetrates society of a standard to treat warfare that, no war should be justified. While this belief may pass down to generations, the value of critics last.

In conclusion, only those who create formal art works are certainly afford society something of lasting value, and for artists of informal art, this is not necessarily the case, for people’s attitudes may vary from time to time. On the other hand, critics present us standards and ideas that can be passed down to generations, leaving people precious legacy.

tangjihedeUID：2107695

zhan.这篇，ft！

tangjihedeUID：2107695

Issue144 It is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value.
提纲：立场：都没有创造~~
1，        艺术家创造了的价值分两种来看
一种是非常正式的艺术，比如宗教的建筑，统治者的画像
这种艺术的价值，类似与历史资料，反映了当时的社会形态，价值观等等，
对于现在的社会，用处不大
另一种是非正式的艺术，如各个时期艺术家的个人作品
可能我们会对其中的部分艺术品有很高的评价，但是这种价值是否LASTING，值得怀疑，毕竟后人的看法，我们不得而知
2评论家创造了LASTING VALUE TO SOCIETY？
在评论作品，不管是好的，还是坏的，都建立了一套评价事物的标准，而这种看待普通事物的标准，有可能随时间流传下来。

好象正文第2段和第3段写的有点矛盾。。汗
Artists or critics, who give society something of external value?[who,a or c, gives...?] Although for artists this issue should be[ reexamined re从何来？？] case by case, critics also make their contributions to society, contrary to what the speaker asserts[TS不是特别清晰。特别是这个reexamined我没看懂]

To begin with, to evaluate artists we need a close scrutiny of their artistic works. Among diverse forms of art, such as painting, sculpture, literature, or dancing, there are broadly two kinds of works of art: formal and informal art. [你的分类还是有来源的？置疑这个分类。]For formal art, exemplified by religious paintings and architectures, they serve more as historical materials than purely art works. After all, the originality condensed in formal art has been reduced to minimum because they are “created” for certain purposes, and usually with certain methods. [西斯廷教堂的壁画的艺术价值被reduced to minimum？michelangelo的啊！]No matter Reims Cathedral in France, or St. Paul’s Cathedral with Italian style, for instance, all are built for religious activities and ceremonies.[对，但St .P 教堂的艺术价值举世公认！] What is more important, they convey specific religious beliefs to the populace. [也没什么不好啊。]Similar is the case of portrait for leaders and historical movements, otherwise directed to communicate political views. [华盛顿渡过特洛瓦尔河是大都会博物馆的镇馆之宝之一，没艺术价值？？]In this light, as long as there exist people appealed to religion, or politics, the value of artist will be continually recognized as display prestige, or beliefs through their formal works.[这么理解艺术个人感觉有些偏了。文艺复兴三杰都给教会打工，bach也是教会雇员，mozart不是给教会打工就是帮皇帝打工，他们的艺术价值没人承认？现代的自由作家的作品就高？]

However, when comes to informal art, the result may be uncertain. To the extent that individual art is, by definition, product of originality and self expression, [强烈抗议你否认其他人艺术作品的原创性的说法]people’s judgment towards them may differ, sway, and even reverse form time to time. Plum in the Golden Vase, for example, has long been treated as pornography in China since the first day of its existence in Ming dynasty. Only until recently does the novel [ft,金瓶梅？金瓶李？]been recognized for its skilled implicitness reflecting social darkness at that time. While individual works of art remains immutable, people of various times may hold different attitudes upon them: people’s distinct standards, criterion, value systems due to different social environments counts. In this light, when we deem Beethoven’s Destine and Van Gogh’s the Starry Night as [worthless/invaluable 吧。说反了。] masterpieces, our next generation may think they are rubbish[...不觉得。前人在发现价值上的失误不表示我们的现在的判断一定不为后人所接受啊。]. However, if generally there is no lasting [standard 这个确实难找，但你的真的认为David有一天会被认为是垃圾？我觉得不合常理。]upon which to make judgment, it is absurd to assert that, anything, including art here, is of lasting value to society. [这一段前面的informal art和后面的部分是什么关系？按你的逻辑上一段也可以受后面的管辖啊。一些formal art在价值今天也不被认可。（但我反对这个观点）]

Then consider the achievement of critics, who is closely associated with artists. Equipped with profound knowledge of the history of art and familiarity of the artists, critics evaluate works of art by comparison and analysis, inform and educate the public. Admittedly, our history is teeming with talented artists who failed into obscurity during their times, and more often than not, it is the critics who to blame, for their misjudgment impede career of artists. But critics as a whole give society a standard by evaluating art works. For example, by criticizing literature with anti-war themes, such as The Sun Also Rises, War and Peace, critics penetrates society of a standard to treat warfare that, no war should be justified. While this belief may pass down to generations, the value of critics last. [你认为艺术品的价值会随时间而变，为什么评论家的标准就不变了？还有，你否认原作者会创造永久的价值，却认为评论家为社会创作了永久的价值，是这个意思么？两个价值的内涵一样么？]

In conclusion, only those who create formal art works are certainly afford society something of lasting value, [?????你不是它们对现在没用么，怎么lasting了？？？]and for artists of informal art, this is not necessarily the case, for people’s attitudes may vary from time to time. On the other hand, critics present us standards and ideas that can be passed down to generations, leaving people precious legacy.


[你的语言没的说，自愧不如。但是你选取的角度太冒险了。感觉你在挑战一般公认的观点，想想能不能换个角度呢？
语言给5。8分，逻辑，。。。

也可能是我误解你的意思了]

tangjihedeUID：2107695

原题的意思是说，只有艺术家创造了作品的永恒价值，和评论家没什么关系。我觉得说伟大艺术家创作了伟大作品的lasting value一般是公认的。但说和评论家一点儿关系没有太过了。因为没有评论家的贡献，那么真正能流传后世的作品会被埋没在成千上万的平庸作品之中，不为人知；因而也就无法lastnig了。

meautoUID：2116250

原题是说艺术家创造了永恒的价值,但是这个价值是否简单的就凝固在艺术品里面了,这个要靠我们自己的界定.

搁了太久,自己都看的晕的稀里糊涂的...............汗..........
当时写的自己都觉得矛盾.

本来的意思是
我不能否认毕加索对于社会和艺术的影响力,但是我个人不喜欢他的画.
对于艺术品来说,它的价值很大程度上依赖于观众的审美标准
现在我不喜欢PICASSO的画,可能是个人的问题
但是没有人能够保证,在社会和相应价值观变化如此之快的今天,未来,
大众对那些名人的作品还有很高的评价
历史上很多被吹捧一时的作品,几百年后再看就不值得一提了, 变的是人们的标准

相对应的,品论家是制定标准的人.一个新的标准在建立起来后,就留给后世了.
我当时写的时候觉得不对劲也就是这里.标准本身会变.

..............总之就是眼高手低,把握不住,写坏了

还是题目BT啊,千万别让偶碰到这个
我还是写双赞成的
一个创造艺术品,一个创造价值.............
:L

[ Last edited by meauto on 2005-8-30 at 23:42 ]

tangjihedeUID：2107695

我碰到的就是这个。有人告诉我144还是5大高频呢。

你个人不喜欢毕加索的画，但无论从评论界还是从大众来讲，都没有否认他的画的价值。你说的几百年后没价值的作品确实有，但有很多流传了上千年的艺术真品，多少代人一直被他们的艺术魅力所打动。我觉得本题的立意是在说已经lasting的作品，它们的价值是否于评论家无关的问题。总觉得你置疑伟大作品是否能继续伟大这一点不是很好写。
另外，评论家的标准和艺术作品本身的value是不一样的。题目在问你《hamlet》中的艺术价值与评论家是否有关，这些价值是指作品涉及到的人类的困境，伦理冲突等等，和评论家的标准（如开头如何，题材如何等等）不是一个意思吧。换句话说，你说的评论家的标准是外在与一个伟大作品本身的，而原文说的价值是作品本身的内在价值。

哥哥家有二师兄UID：2124390

这个讨论有点深度了