GRE作文范文 Issue-41

“In order for a work of art – whether film, literature, sculpture, or a song – to have merit, it must be understandable to most people.”

嘉文博译Sample Essay

It is impossible for one person to speak for every other person on earth about which works of art - whether visual or audio - have any value. No one individual has the right to decide the merit of any particular artistic endeavor, nor does the majority have the right to dictate what art has merit to the minority of the population. For many reasons, the value of any work of art is in the eye of the beholder, whether the person that understands it is only the artist himself or the whole of the earth’s population.

First of all, the question over what is or is not a work of art has been debated endlessly over the centuries. Because no human being is just like any other (although we are all created equal), every person has a highly subjective idea of what is or is not art, whether it is a work of literature, a sculpture, a painting, a poem or a song. What is one man’s work of art is another man’s garbage. Indeed, it is not necessary for an individual to even understand a work of art to find it aesthetically pleasing to the eye or ear. In the 1950’s, the song “La Bamba” was a huge hit in the United States although most people didn’t understand a word of the song – it was entirely in Spanish. There are numerous examples of songs in foreign languages that have been worldwide hits, even in countries that could not understand a word of what was being sung. Particularly with a musical composition, it is not so much the understanding of the lyrics that is important but rather the beat of the music.

Similarly, paintings and sculptures are always open to a wide variety of interpretations. No one person can know exactly what was in the mind of the creator, even if that artisan is still alive to try to explain what it was that he or she was trying to create. Paintings and sculptures that appear at first glance to be relatively straightforward in meaning can have hidden nuances and subtexts that are understood by practically no one but the most well trained art experts. Simply because the majority of the population does not understand it does not mean that the work of art has no merit.

Finally, one needs to only consider the fact that not all art is intended to be understood and enjoyed by the masses to observe that a simple majority does not determine the true value or merit of a work of art. Artists often create a particular piece based purely on their own personal desire for self-expression, sometimes to the point of expressing disdain for what the vox populi states that it likes or wants. In a similar vein, who would like to be the one that tells a class of kindergarteners that their just-completed finger paintings are not works of art because no one understands them? Who has the right to tell a blind artist that what he or she has painted has no value because no one can understand it?

In summary, the merit that is found in art does not come from a vote of the majority of the population on whether they understand it or not. Art can have significance even if the only value that is realized is that of the self-expression of its creator. Particularly with a field as subjective as art, the relative merit of the subject lies not with the majority but within each individual that bears witness to its presence.

参考译文

为了使一件艺术品——无论是电影还是文学，雕塑或者歌曲——具有某种价值，它必须要使大多数人理解它。

　　一个人代表世界上所有其他人来断定哪些艺术作品——无论是视觉艺术品还是听觉艺术品——具有价值，这是不可能的。没有任何人有权力决定某项艺术成就的价值，多数人也没有权力武断什么艺术对于少数人是有价值的。从许多方面讲，任何艺术作品的价值都存在于欢赏者的眼光，不管这观赏者是艺术家本人还是全世界民众。

　　首先，什么是艺术品什么不是艺术品这一问题已经被无休无止地争论了数百年。因为没有任何人与其他另一个人完全相同（尽管我们都生来平等），故每个人对于什么是艺术品，什么不是艺术品的看法都是非常主观的，无论它是文学作品，还是雕塑作品，绘画作品，一首诗或者一支歌。一个人的艺术作品很可能是另一个人的垃圾。的确，没有必要一个人必须理解一件艺术品以便发现它审美地悦目或悦耳。20世纪50年代，歌曲“LA　BAMBA”在美国引起极大轰动，尽管大多数人并不明白歌曲的一个词，因为它是用西班牙语写成的。有许多外语歌曲都是全世界流行，甚至在某些国家，所唱的一个词也听不懂。尤其是音乐作品，重要的不是听懂它的歌词而是聆听音乐的节奏。

　　同样，对绘画作品和雕塑作品也可以进行多种多样的解释。没有任何人确切地知道作者创作之际脑海里在想些什么，即便是那位艺术家仍然活着，试图去说明他、她当时努力要创造的是什么。有些绘画作品和雕塑作品乍一看似乎意义相对直截了当，但它们所隐藏的含义和潜台词只有受过良好训练的艺术家才能理解。只是因为大多数人不理解并不意味着一件艺术品就没有价值。

　　最后，我们只需要考虑一下这样一个事实：并非所有的艺术都是需要民众理解和欣赏的，这说明简单的多数并不能决定一件艺术品的真正价值。艺术家常常根据他们纯粹的自我表现的愿望创作一件特定的作品，有时是在表达对民众喜爱之物的鄙视。同样，谁能告诉幼儿园的孩童们，他们刚刚完成的手指画不是艺术品，因为没有人理解它们？谁有权力告诉一位盲人艺术家说他/她所画的作品没有价值，原因是没有人理解它？

　　总而言之，艺术品中所被发现的价值不是来自人口中的大多数人对是否理解这一艺术进行的投票表决。即使艺术品中得到实现的唯一价值是创作者的自我表现这一价值，该艺术品仍然是有意义的。尤其是艺术这一非常主观的领域，其价值不在于大多数民众的看法，而在于每一个人对所存在价值的认识。

 

GRE作文范文 Argument-41

The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Parkville Daily Newspaper.

嘉文博译Sample Essay

"Throughout the country last year, as more and more children below the age of nine participated in youth-league softball and soccer, over 80,000 of these young players suffered injuries. When interviewed for a recent study, youth-league softball players in several major cities also reported psychological pressure from coaches and parents to win games. Furthermore, education experts say that long practice sessions for these sports take away time that could be used for academic activities. Since the disadvantages apparently outweigh any advantages, we in Parkville should discontinue organized athletic competition for children under nine."

In this argument, the writer claims that more and more children below the age of nine were participating in youth league softball and soccer last year and that more than eighty thousand of those players suffered injuries. The writer also claims that youth league softball players in several major cities reported psychological pressure from coaches and parents to win games when interviewed for a study. Additionally, the writer cites educational experts as saying that long practice sessions for such sports take away time that could be used for academic activities. The writer then comes to the conclusion that the disadvantages outweigh any advantages; therefore the city of Parkville should discontinue organized athletic competition for children under the age of nine. This argument is based on problematic reasoning and it should therefore be rejected.

The first problem with this argument is that it does not define what types of injuries the eighty thousand youngsters suffered. Although any injury, no matter how slight, is undesirable, the argument is weakened by not discussing the relative severity of these injuries. This is necessary information when weighing the advantages or disadvantages of youth league sports for children under nine.

Secondly, the writer mentions that youth league softball players in several major cities reported psychological pressure from coaches and parents to win games. The problems with this information are obvious: the study was only for one sport, not all types of athletics; it was only conducted in the major cities, which may or may not be representative of what young athletes throughout the rest of the country would report; and the number of children reporting the psychological pressure as compared to those who did not report it is never mentioned. It is possible that only a few children reported such pressure. Moreover, the term “psychological pressure” is not defined and its meaning is unclear. A study that reports that an unknown number of children feel psychological pressure without defining what that term means, as well as covering only one type of sporting activity and only in the major cities is very weak evidence for discontinuing all athletic activities for children under nine years of age.

Furthermore, the writer mentions that long practice sessions take away time that could be used for academic activities. There is absolutely no evidence presented that Parkville youth league sports have long practice sessions, or that they have any practice sessions at all for that matter. In addition, too much time for academic activities is not healthy for children; they need time to exercise their bodies as well as their minds. Without evidence that long practice sessions are hurting the children’s studies, the argument is further weakened.

Finally, the writer jumps to the conclusion that the disadvantages apparently outweigh the advantages and that Parkville should discontinue organized athletic competition for children under nine. In this argument, the writer only mentions the disadvantages and none of the advantages. No evidence is presented that indicates that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages – some weak and ambiguous information is merely thrown into the argument. Furthermore, the writer ignores other changes that could be made short of discontinuing the program. Solutions such as shortening practice sessions, enforcing mandatory safety equipment rules and emphasizing sportsmanship rather than winning or losing are all ignored by the writer, which greatly weakens the argument.

In summary, the writer has done nothing more than state an opinion with some anecdotal information included that proves nothing. Without providing direct evidence that the children under the age of nine in Parkville are being hurt more than helped by organized athletic competition, the writer’s argument is unconvincing and should be rejected.

参考译文
下述文字摘至一封致《 Parkville日报》某编辑的信函:

　　“去年在我们整个国家，由于越来越多的9岁以下的孩子参加了青少年联赛的垒球和足球运动，这些年轻球员中有不止80，000多人受伤。在接受某项近期的研究的访谈时，若干大城市中青少年联赛的垒球运动员称，他们承受着来自教练和家长的赢球压力。此外，教育专家称，这些体育运动员所需的漫长训练期耗费了原本可用于学习活动的时间。既然弊明显大于利，我们在Parkille 市就应该停止9岁以下的儿童进行有组织的体育竞赛。”

　　在上述论述中，信函作者称，越来越多的9岁以下的儿童去年参加了青少年联赛的垒球和足球运动，而在这些运动员中，有80，000多名运动员受过伤。信函作者还宣称，若干个大城市中的青少年联赛垒球运动员在接受某项研究的访谈中说，他们承受着来自教练和家长们的赢球压力。此外，信函作者援引了教育专家的话说，这些体育项目所需的漫长训练期浪费了原本可用于学习活动的时间。这位作者接下来得出结论认为，弊显然大于利，因此Parkville市应该停止9岁以下的儿童进行任何有组织的体育竞赛。上述论述完全基于漏洞百出的逻辑推理，故应予摈弃。

　　 上述论述的第一个问题是，它没有清楚地界定80，000多个小孩子所受的伤属于哪些类型。虽然任何伤痛，无论多么的轻微，均是不可取的，但上述论述由于没能讨论这些伤痛的相对严重程度而受到削弱。有关伤痛类型的信息应是必要的，因为它有助于我们衡量9岁以下孩童从事青少年联赛体育活动的利与弊。

　　第二，信函作者提到，若干个大城市的青少年联赛的垒球运动员称，他们承受着来自教练和家长们的赢球压力。这一信息所存在的问题是显而易见的：该项研究仅是针对一个体育项目的，而非针对所有类型的体育比赛；它仅仅是在大城市进行的，它或许能够也或许不能够典型地代表全国其他地区青少年运动员的感受；与那些没有说承受着心理压力的孩童相比，承认承受着心理压力的儿童的数量绝未被提到。情况有可能是，仅有很少一些儿童声称承受着这种压力。另外，“心理压力”这一术语未被定义，其含义模糊不清。一份调查研究，如果它仅报告说一些数量不明的孩子感到承受着心理压力，不对相关术语进行定义，仅涵盖一种类型的体育活动，且仅在某几座大城市进行，它只能充当极为微弱的证据，不足以来停止9岁以下儿童所有类别的体育活动。再者，信函作者提到，漫长的训练期会占用原本可用以学习活动的珍贵时间。信函作者绝对没有列举任何证据来证明，Parkville市青少年联赛的体育活动需要漫长的训练期，以及因为那一原因而有任何训练期。此外，太多的时间用在学习上对孩子也是不利于健康的；他们需要有时间来活动他们的身体，而不仅仅是活动他们的大脑。没有拿出证据来证明漫长的训练期正危及孩子们的学业，故该项论述受到进一步的削弱。

　　最后，信函作者轻率地得出结论，称弊显然大于利，并且Parkville市应该终止9岁以下的儿童进行任何有组织的体育比赛。在此论述中，信函作者仅提及了弊而未提及利。根本没有任何证据可显示弊大于利。我们所看到的仅仅是被塞入到本项论述中的某些缺乏力度和模棱两可的信息。此外，信函作者忽略了除终止体育项目之外所能采取的其他改善措施。像缩短训练周期，执行强制性的安全设备规定，以及强调体育精神而不是单纯的比赛输赢。所有这些解决问题的方法均被信函作者视而不见，由此而严重地削弱了其论据。

　　归纳而言，信函作者所做的，只是利用某些什么都证明不了的趣事轶闻性质的信息来表达某种个人观点。由于没有提供直接的证据来证明Parkville 市9岁以下的孩童从事有组织的体育竞赛所蒙受的弊是否会大于所得到的利，故信函作者的论述不能令人信服，应予摈弃。

嘉文博译郑重声明：