0910AW SPECTACULAR之【同主题写作】ISSUE144 by 【galloper】A28inlamp

LovellaUID: 2616552

I 144 It is the artist, not the critic,who gives society something of lasting value.

(已修改过，这是第二遍，改的太久，头疼~等批~！如有疑问欢迎BS，哈哈）

Of what lasting value is art to society in general? This evaluation is difficult to quantify for the reason that art can be appreciated in more than one way, and often susceptible to various interpretations. Yet, we can still use words from Iser.W-a famous theorist-for reference, “When art appeals aesthetic feelings, arouses emotional communication and holds up a mirror to contemporary society, influencing people’s vision toward the real world and thus promote a social construction of reality; Its social value will be far-reaching and lasting.”

No matter how art’s lasting value is defined, this value exists on the premise of a certain consensus—art works must be first accessible and appreciable to public. Both artist and critic, in this process, play indispensable roles with different ways although. And finally the lasting value should be verified by time.

It is the artist, the creator, who provides the foundation of all appreciation and criticism, and thereby creates the origination of art’s value. On the one hand, art expresses what is deep inside artists, conveying aesthetic emotions to communicate with audience through which affects their spiritual world, and thereby to some degree influence values of a civilization. Either Shakespeare’s novels or art works of the Renaissance humanists perform a vital role in change people’s spiritual values at that time. On the other hand, as a record of history, art reveals the social reality and ideological revolution of era in which its creators live. For instance, John Singer Sargent’s “Madame Pierre Gautreau (Madam X)” (1884), caused a huge uproar over the woman’s reddish pink ear lobe, considered far too suggestive and supposedly ruining the high-society model’s reputation, which was afterwards regarded as a progress of breaking the bondage of ossified thinking. However, without the artist, influence above will not exist at all.

Nevertheless, achieving the above-mentioned functions necessitates critics, who enable public to appreciate art and perform an important role to art revolution. First, artists themselves can not make their works known well by public for their attention focusing on creation, and also audience often lacks a sufficient understanding of those abstract art works. With interpretation and illustration from art critics, audience can further grasp what artists want to convey. A simple example is that most museums and exhibition have guides to make art introductions to visitors, helping them to hold a general view of artists’ life and their works’ creation background. Another, critics can excavate artists in the crowd and promote art innovations. Many artists became famous due to critics’ exploration, and also new art forms came from critics’ contribution. Specifically, 1910 marked a great exhibition of the Post-Impressionists, which organized by Roger Fry, an English art critic, by which first brought art of Monet and Van Gogh to the public, shocking the art world and making Fry the spiritual leadership of 20 century. Critics, who serve as a bridge between artists and public, make great efforts in giving society something of lasting value as well as artists.

Despite the fact that the limitations of critics may mislead public’s art appreciation or even dim some great artists, their contribution to make art’s value lasting will not be reduced because the true value of art necessitates verification from time. Actually, great art works are not always appealing to a majority of viewers. This is inevitable because that art is often hard to quantify by contemporary and perception is always colored by experience and subjectivity. Like the example of “Madam X”, though it was controversial and unacceptable then, what the artist conveyed was proved to be a great ideological revolution to society by later generations. It is true that criticism from professional are not correct all the time, but great art can weather time. Critics’ efforts are active and positive overall.

Art reflects artists and public’s thinking; Art influence social values; and art reveals a demand of socially spiritual development. In a word, art can creates reality, therein lies its lasting value to society. It is the artist who creates the origination of value, and the critic who spread art and develops it. The former germinates the seed of tree while the latter waters and nourishes it; finally the annual-rings will represent how lasting art’s social value exactly is.

snail8843UID: 2516929

1# Lovella

A28_I144_ A32snail8843修改
Of what lasting value is art to society in general? This evaluation is difficult to quantify for the reason that art can be appreciated in more than one way, and often susceptible to various interpretations. Yet, we can still use words from Iser.W-a famous theorist-for reference, “When art appeals aesthetic feelings, arouses emotional communication and holds up a mirror to contemporary society, influencing people’s vision toward the real world and thus promote a social construction of reality; Its social value will be far-reaching and lasting.” （TS是什么？好像第一段没有体现出来）

No matter how art’s lasting value is defined, this value exists on the premise of a certain consensus—art works must be first accessible and appreciable to public. Both artist and critic, in this process, play indispensable roles with different ways although. And finally the lasting value should be verified by time.(TS原来在第二段…能不能把这二段合在一块呢?感觉第一段没起到什么作用，虽然写了很长)

It is the artist, the creator, who provides the foundation of all appreciation and criticism, and thereby creates the origination of art’s value. On the one hand, art expresses what is deep inside artists, conveying aesthetic emotions to communicate with audience through which affects their spiritual world, and thereby to some degree influence values of a civilization. Either Shakespeare’s novels or art works of the Renaissance humanists perform a vital role in change people’s spiritual values at that time. On the other hand, as a record of history, art reveals the social reality and ideological revolution of era in which its creators live. For instance, John Singer Sargent’s “Madame Pierre Gautreau (Madam X)” (1884), caused a huge uproar over the woman’s reddish pink ear lobe, considered far too suggestive and supposedly ruining the high-society model’s reputation, which was afterwards regarded as a progress of breaking the bondage of ossified thinking. However, without the artist, influence above will not exist at all.

Nevertheless, achieving the above-mentioned functions necessitates critics, who enable public to appreciate art and perform an important role to art revolution. First, artists themselves can not make their works known well by public for their attention focusing on creation, and also audience often lacks a sufficient understanding of those abstract art works. With interpretation and illustration from art critics, audience can further grasp what artists want to convey. A simple example(这个例子涉及到批评家了么？) is that most museums and exhibition have guides to make art introductions to visitors, helping them to hold a general view of artists’ life and their works’ creation background. Another, critics can excavate artists in the crowd and promote art innovations. Many artists became famous due to critics’ exploration, and also new art forms came from critics’ contribution. Specifically, 1910 marked a great exhibition of the Post-Impressionists, which organized by Roger Fry, an English art critic, by which first brought art of Monet and Van Gogh to the public, shocking the art world and making Fry the spiritual leadership of 20 century. Critics, who serve as a bridge between artists and public, make great efforts in giving society something of lasting value as well as artists.

Despite the fact that the limitations of critics may mislead public’s art appreciation or even dim some great artists, their contribution to make art’s value lasting will not be reduced because the true value of art necessitates verification from time. Actually, great art works are not always appealing to a majority of viewers. This is inevitable because that art is often hard to quantify by contemporary and perception is always colored by experience(没看懂) and subjectivity. Like the example of “Madam X”, though it was controversial and unacceptable then, what the artist conveyed was proved to be a great ideological revolution to society by later generations. It is true that criticism from professional are not correct all the time, but great art can weather time. Critics’ efforts are active and positive overall.(Madam X的例子要说明Critic的什么作用呢？没看出来)

Art reflects artists and public’s thinking; Art influence social values; and art reveals a demand of socially spiritual development. In a word, art can creates reality, therein lies its lasting value to society. It is the artist who creates the origination of value, and the critic who spread art and develops it. The former germinates the seed of tree while the latter waters and nourishes it; finally the annual-rings will represent how lasting art’s social value exactly is.

总结：觉得还是不错的，但觉得有三个问题：
TS最好放在第一段提出，引子有些过长
第四、五段的例子没能和论点很好的结合
字数太多了，750+，考试来得及写这么多么…

i2000sUID: 2108019

1# Lovella
I 144 It is the artist, not the critic,who gives society something of lasting value.

(已修改过，这是第二遍，改的太久，头疼~等批~！如有疑问欢迎BS，哈哈）

Of what lasting value is art to society in general? This evaluation is difficult to quantify for the reason that art can be appreciated in more than one way, and often susceptible to various interpretations. Yet, we can still use words from Iser.W-a famous theorist of art-for reference, “When art appeals aesthetic feelings, arouses emotional communication and holds up a mirror to contemporary society, influencing people’s vision toward the real world and thus promote a social construction of reality; Its social value will be far-reaching and long-lasting.”(the last quota seems to concentrates on the question of how can art be entitled of lasting value, so why not just replace the heart-touching first interrogative sentence as the respondent one?)

No matter how art’s lasting value is defined, this value exists on the premise of a certain consensus—art works must be first accessible and appreciable to public. Both artist and critic, in this process, play indispensable roles with different ways although. And finally the lasting value should be verified by time.(There seems to be some logical leaps between the first and the second paragraph. )

It is the artist, the creator, who provides the foundation of all appreciation and criticism, and thereby creates the origination of art’s value. On the one hand, art expresses what is deep inside artists, conveying aesthetic emotions to communicate with audience through which affects their spiritual world, and thereby to some degree influence values of a civilization. Either Shakespeare’s novels or art works (parallel with the novels? ) of the Renaissance humanists perform a vital role in change people’s spiritual values at that time. On the other hand, as a record of history, art reveals the social reality and ideological revolution of era in which its creators live. For instance, John Singer Sargent’s “Madame Pierre Gautreau (Madam X)” (1884), caused a huge uproar over the woman’s reddish pink ear lobe, considered far too suggestive and supposedly ruining the high-society model’s reputation, which was afterwards regarded as a progress of breaking the bondage of ossified thinking. However(Interpose it in the middle of the sentence should be more nice^), without the artist, influence above will not exist at all.

Nevertheless, achieving the above-mentioned functions necessitates critics, who enable public to appreciate art and perform an important role to art revolution. First, artists themselves can not make their works known well by public for their attention (mainly) focusing on creation, and also audience often lacks a sufficient understanding of those abstract art works. With interpretation and illustration from art critics, audience can further grasp what artists want to convey.(The above two sentences can be combined into one, beginning with 'the critics...' which may link the sentence to the TS more tightly in logic.) A simple example is that most museums and exhibition have guides to make art introductions to visitors, helping them to hold a general view of artists’ life and their works’ creation background. Another, critics can excavate artists in the crowd and promote (their) art innovations. Many artists became famous due to critics’ exploration, and also new art forms came from critics’ contribution. Specifically, 1910 marked a great exhibition of the Post-Impressionists, which organized by Roger Fry, an English art critic, by which first brought art of Monet and Van Gogh to the public, shocking the art world and making Fry the spiritual leadership of (the) 20th century. Critics, who serve as a bridge between artists and public, make great efforts in giving society something of lasting value as well as artists.

Despite the fact(disposed) that the limitations of critics('s horinzon) may mislead public’s art appreciation or even dim some great artists, their contribution to make art’s value lasting will not be reduced because the true value of art necessitates verification from time. Actually, great art works are not always appealing to a majority of viewers. This is inevitable because that art is often hard to quantify by contemporary and perception is always colored by experience and subjectivity. Like the example of “Madam X”, though it was controversial and unacceptable then, what the artist conveyed was proved to be a great ideological revolution to society by later generations. It is true that criticism from professional are not correct all the time, but great art can weather time. Critics’ efforts are active and positive overall.(What do you aim to? Is that effective to exponent your opinion?)

Art reflects artists and public’s thinking; Art influence social values; and art reveals a demand of socially spiritual development. In a word, art can creates reality, therein lies its lasting value to society. It is the artist who creates the origination of value, and the critic who spread art and develops it. The former germinates the seed of tree while the latter waters and nourishes it; finally, the annual-rings will represent how lasting art’s social value exactly is.


Tips:
You write, as you debate in our BS. But I think writing is not merely piling with matierals at hand. It needs subtle structure and logical order. Admittedly, the matierals you utilized are proficient and updated, some logical bracings distort the beauty of your article as a whole.


I am a critic here, you know my role and how to confront my critique. Come on, and create beauty more sophisticatedly.