雅思大作文7分范文及解析：人人都能创造艺术

创作时间:

作者:

@小白创作中心

雅思大作文7分范文及解析：人人都能创造艺术

引用

来源

https://www.eol.cn/waiyu/yasi/236734.html

雅思托福考试是全球最广泛使用的英语语言考试之一，被许多国家的大学、移民机构、企业和政府部门用作衡量语言能力的标准。考生需要在听、说、读、写四个方面进行测试，其中有不少同学想要了解：雅思大作文7分范文及解析：人人都能创造艺术，那么下面中国教育在线小编就来和大家分享一番。

题目信息

题目类型：双边类大作文，社会类话题

题目内容：
Some people think every human being can create artworks (e.g. painting), while others think only the people born with the ability can do that. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

题目来源：2015年10月31日亚太雅思大作文

题目大意：
有人认为人人都能创造艺术（如绘画），而其他人认为只有天才可以搞艺术。双边讨论。

写作思路解析

思路一：
双边讨论类的题目，可以自由讨论双方各自的利弊。这两个观点中，都有表述不合理的地方：甲方观点中every human和乙方only是这道题的两个关键词；

甲方：every human being can create artworks，是一种武断表达，如果同意，论证时就要为这种观点找到一个合理的前提或限制条件；如果反对，则提出反例，证明有人无法create artworks（如盲人无法绘画）
乙方：only the people born with the ability，也是一种武断表达，如果同意，论证时就要为这种观点找到一个合理的前提或限制条件；如果反对，则提出反例，证明仅有天才而缺乏其他要素也无法create artworks（如绘画和雕塑的专业技巧需要通过后天学习获得）；

思路二：
两个观点都是伪命题：甲方所谓的artworks定义模糊（没有明确的标准来判定什么东西可以称之为artworks）；而乙方观点中born with the ability也是一个无法被认定的概念（没有标准和方法去判定一项能力是否天生）；

写作大纲

引言：提出艺术定义的复杂性，说明两种观点的不合理性
正文第一段：分析"只有天才才能搞艺术"的观点
正文第二段：分析"人人都能创造艺术"的观点
结论：总结两种观点都不成立的原因

高分写作示范

The term art presents a conundrum. While it is traditionally believed to be a domain inhabited only by geniuses, others are claiming that everybody is entitled to play a part. Personally, I would say that neither of the two assumptions makes sense to meit doesnt seem to be a real authoritative definition of art, and by the same token there is no universal agreement on what attributes make up an artist.

Those who credit artists exclusively with the genetic code are oblivious to one problemIt is difficult to imagine any scientific method or objective standard that could be applied to predict an innate artistic propensity of a person. Examining masterpieces in art galleries shows evidence to support this views: Given the vast diversity of artistic expressiongraphic, music, sculpture, landscape and so on, I dont think it is persuasive to attribute these techniques purely to aptitude while ignoring the contributions of professional training or other extrinsic motivation factors that stimulated their creativity.

Likewise, the opinion to label art as a free zone for anybody also seems absurd to me. Indeed, such a delusion has crept into the thinking of many modernists nowadays. Those self-proclaimed devotees of Dadaism, for example, present a toilet or bicycle wheel in a gallery setting and it is proclaimed by alternative critics as art. Nevertheless, that begs another questionwhat can be defined as artworks according to their perception? Ones definition of art is becoming more subjective and ambiguousone creation might be fascinating and attractive to some while totally repulsive to others.

I would conclude, therefore, that neither of the two views can be deemed justified. It Is evident that there is no universal standard that outlines art, while beholders respond to differences in aptitude and technique in their personal fashion.