In order for any work of art — for example, a film, a novel, a poem, or a song — to have merit, it must be understandable to most people.
The question of whether a work of art, be it a film, a novel, a poem, or a song, must be understandable to a majority of people in order to possess merit is a complex and subjective matter. While accessibility is undoubtedly important for broad appreciation, equating understanding with merit oversimplifies the diverse nature and purpose of art forms.
First and foremost, accessibility is a significant factor in determining the impact and value of a work of art. Art serves as a medium of communication, allowing artists to convey emotions, ideas, and experiences to an audience. When a work is readily understandable, it has the potential to resonate with a wider range of individuals, transcending cultural, linguistic, and societal boundaries. For example, a film with a universal theme of love or a novel exploring fundamental human experiences can connect with people from various backgrounds, enriching their lives.
However, it is important to recognize that the merit of a work of art is not solely contingent on its level of accessibility. Artistic expression often seeks to challenge norms, provoke thought, and evoke emotions. This may lead to works that are deliberately abstract, experimental, or laden with symbolism, making them less immediately understandable to a broad audience. Take, for instance, the avant-garde paintings of the 20th century, which pushed the boundaries of traditional representation, challenging viewers to engage in a deeper contemplation of form and meaning.
Furthermore, the notion of "understandability" can be highly subjective and context-dependent. Different art forms and genres have distinct modes of communication and require varying levels of prior knowledge or cultural literacy. Appreciating a complex symphony may necessitate a background in music theory, while understanding a minimalist poem might rely on an appreciation for linguistic nuance. In these cases, depth of understanding is more important than widespread comprehension.
In conclusion, while accessibility is undeniably a valuable aspect of art, it should not be the sole criterion for determining merit. Art serves a multitude of purposes, and some works are intentionally designed to challenge conventional understanding. The richness of artistic expression lies in its diversity, catering to a wide spectrum of tastes, preferences, and levels of familiarity. Ultimately, a work's merit should be assessed based on its ability to provoke thought, evoke emotion, and contribute to the broader cultural and intellectual dialogue.
- Claim It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero Reason The reputation of anyone who is subjected to media scrutiny will eventually be diminished Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree o 66
- In any field of inquiry the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions 50
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future 66
- Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoni 66
- In order for any work of art for example a film a novel a poem or a song to have merit it must be understandable to most people 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: Whether; The question whether
The question of whether a work of art, be it a film, a novel, a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 33.0505617978 39% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2185.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 384.0 442.535393258 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.69010416667 5.05705443957 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4267276788 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.8004625184 2.79657885939 136% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5703125 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 697.5 704.065955056 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.77640449438 450% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.7812145091 60.3974514979 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 121.388888889 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3333333333 23.4991977007 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.22222222222 5.21951772744 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.373967067105 0.243740707755 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0966137834164 0.0831039109588 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100262401716 0.0758088955206 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.206855229724 0.150359130593 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.126766312495 0.0667264976115 190% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.1392134831 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 48.8420337079 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.72 12.1639044944 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.48 8.38706741573 125% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 100.480337079 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.7820224719 136% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.