[Work] GRE issue #134
It is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting
value. * critics: a person who evaluates works of art, such as novels,
films, music, paintings,etc.
寫的時候只有一個心得，就是自己的字彙真的很少
光是要寫"有很高的價值"寫來寫去都是同樣幾個字...
換句話說要怎麼練習啊 T_T
I disagree with the statement that it is the artist instead of the critic
that gives society something of lasting value. An artist is the one to make
some ideas come true, and thus the value of the ideas can be seen. However,
for a value to be long-lasting, a critic is also needed to examine the art
works and decide which ones deserve the highest value.
There are some cases where artists and critics are equally important. For
example, in the field of painting, we need creative artists to create great
works, while the critics evaluate the works. By doing so, the artists know
what to improve in their following works, and the public have different
viewpoints to appreciate these painting. In music, we do need both excellent
artists and critics. Take myself for instance. Before I buy a CD, I would
read the commend by the critics and see if it is the kind of music I like.
People have deeper understand of a great work because the introduction by
critics.
It is almost impossible for people to read every novel published, but a
critic probably can. There are a variety of novels published every day. Some
of these novels are influential, and others may not be worthwhile to read.
How can people know which novel to read? A critic in the field of novel has
the responsibility to read, to analyze and propose his opinions about the
novels. He can act as the filter of novels, telling the public which novels
are good to read, and thus the valuable ones can be known to people, being
influential in the society. Critics usually influence the field of novel more
than the writers do by creating the trend, that is, to declare what is the
most popular genre and what is not.
No matter how good a film an artist creates, it will not be
highly-esteemed to the society unless it is accepted by it. A critic of films
usually plays an important role, too. Many of the movies are too obscured for
the public to understand. Although people know that these movies are of great
metaphor and high reputation, they are not interested to see the movies
because of the lack of understanding. Can a movie which is not appreciated by
most people be of lasting value? I do not think so. Without the introduction
and introspection of a film more friendly to the society, the film can not
have its impact on people. A critic is the one to introduce a work to the
world.
On balance, works cannot be created without artists, but to make in of
lasting value is critics' duty. Only after a work is well known to the public
because of the critics' introduction can it be everlasting.
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.166.249.8
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文：
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 2 篇)：
ST-English 近期熱門文章
PTT職涯區 即時熱門文章
