It is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value.
The author claims that the artist endows persistent value in the society which cannot be done by critics. In my view, I basically agree with this idea. In general, critics, whose works largely depend on artists, cannot provide society with things of lasting value. I will show my analysis below.
To begin with, critics’ opinions toward the same artwork can vary over time, and therefore cannot produce a long-lasting value. The criticism from critics is subjective, it is elicited from critics’ personal thought: including the way they perceive the world, their inclination, even their own bias, which vary among generations. To illustrate, Van Gogh, in his lifetime, his paintings did not fit the value of contemporary critics and did not be appreciated by contemporary people and critics - as a result, only one artwork was sold in his lifetime. After he died, however, critics' values changed so that they are fascinated by his unique manner that depicts the flow of light. Finally, his paintings win the popularity and are still honored by people today.
Furthermore, the criticism merely an auxiliary work accompanied artworks. Critics act as a role that helps interprets the content of artworks. That is, the main work of critics is to utilize their skills to analyze the details and present their insights to the public. It largely depends on the artworks they focus on. These efforts are not original and cannot be a long-lasting value. On the other hand, the things that artists create are rife of originality: the style of a painting, the gusto of a novel, the views of sculptures can be creative, and thus passing through history.
However, although critics are lack of original values that can last through generation by itself, it can still have long-lasting influences through history. First, critics can influence artworks. Artists assimilate suggestions from critics then produce and consummate their works. Second, critics can bring new aspects and insights to the public. The same works can be appreciated in different aspects, and these new angles of artwork can be passed to the future. In this way, the thought of critics can integrate into or accompany artists’ work thus perpetuate through history.
In sum, owing to the different roles of artists and critics, to a large extend, only artists can produce long-lasting values. Nevertheless, critics can indirectly influence artists and artwork then their thought can pass through generations.
- The study of history has value only to the extent that it is relevant to our daily lives 87
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants Recently butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States This change however has had little impact 61
- The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them not by their contemporary 66
- We learn more from people whose views we share in common than from those whose ideas contradict ours 62
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours Use specific reasons and examples to support 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, still, then, therefore, thus, in general, as a result, in my view, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 12.9106741573 31% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2087.0 2235.4752809 93% => OK
No of words: 397.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25692695214 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74700343613 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 215.323595506 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513853904282 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 626.4 704.065955056 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.38483146067 251% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.8990624252 60.3974514979 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.7391304348 118.986275619 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2608695652 23.4991977007 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.26086956522 5.21951772744 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.256047285225 0.243740707755 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0775132694511 0.0831039109588 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0526082123769 0.0758088955206 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155545604706 0.150359130593 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0200841324868 0.0667264976115 30% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.1392134831 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.93 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 100.480337079 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.