What is it?
In their critical thinking exercise that concludes the reading "Beautifully Broken", Rogers and Zemach invite us to discuss two questions that follow up ideas in the reading we have now read carefully, (2018). These questions invite us to apply the ideas in the reading to our own experience, or to give our own opinions on related issues. 
____________________________________
Response
____________________________________
Questions
After thinking about them for few minutes, write down your response to Rogers and Zemach's questions in a comment below. You probably want to write two or three paragraphs.
According to the article, the story about the Japanese ruler is probably not true nor are interpretations of some practices from other cultures.
Excerpt from page 29 -
the origin story of kintsugi
Should people still discuss those stories? Why / why not?
(Examples will probably be useful here.)
- Do you believe it is ever possible for a work of art to be perfect?
You have 15:00 minutes to plan and write a response to the two questions. I suggest you divide your time roughly as:
- planning = 3:00 minutes
- writing = 10:00 minutes, and
- editing = 2:00 minutes.
A helpful strategy
Imagine you are writing for someone who has not read the question you are answering or the article that the question follows up. Your job is to clearly communicate your response to that reader, so it might help to paraphrase the question at the start of your response to it. But you need to rewrite (paraphrase) the idea in the question as a statement.
Because your writing should make sense independently of the question it might be answering, it is usually useful to give background, which can often be done by paraphrasing the question into statements that begin your answer. This is especially important in exams such as IELTS and TOEFL.
____________________________________
Reference
- Rogers, L. & Zemach, D. E. (2018). Skillful 3: Reading & Writing (2nd. ed.). London: Macmillan Education
I'm think in nowadays some people want to know about some of ancient story or ancient tradition so we would discuss to solve some people doubt.
ReplyDeleteAnd I think some of art work perfect because who did that is expert in art work or it just luck and coincidence to do a perfect art work in the past, but now it have machine so I'm not sue about now.
I agreed with Pun on term that people may doubt about ancient story. Being discuss about helps us understand the traditional life and traditional way of thinking that previous generation that try to pass it on to the next generation. Even though the story may not real but it does have a meaningful attitude toward life that youth can learn from.
DeleteI am so curious about how the machine help to create perfect art pieces. I think that it's interesting one. However, I don't agree with you that perfect art pieces tend to be made by professionals. In my view, people can create the perfect art pieces themselves or someone. For instance, the son's drawing is perfect for his dad, famous art pieces of Andy andy Warhol might perfect for the buyer who bought these art pieces at an extremely high price, despite being despised by reviewers.
DeleteI agree with you that ancient stories are worth to be discuss to discover the mystery. I also enjoy reading ancient stories such as the story of Phra Abhai Mani. The story is the fantasy adventures of Phra Aphai Mani, the main protagonist, who fell in love with a beautiful maiden. Some Thai academics say that the story shows influence of European colonial powers to Thailand in which inspired by Greek epics and Persian literature. As mentioned, investing on such ancient story can discover new information.
DeleteI like Phing's example of Andy Warhol's works of art, which seem to me not very good art at all. They are strong pieces of work that make useful social commentary, but that does not make them works of art.
DeleteIn contrast, the work of Picasso is almost all excellent art: if anyone's art is perfect, some of Picasso's pieces would qualify for that adjective. As Phing reminds us, concrete examples are very helpful.
(In fact I think most of Warhol's work is rubbish looking to provoke a response, but that response does not seem to me to be appreciation of a great work of art.) But if you are a Warhol fan or Picasso hater, please feel welcome to disagree.
ReplyDeleteI reckon people should discuss those stories because they are about life phylosophy. If people know deeper with this topic, they make understand what the life should be and what should they release or not because life has different colours. It is very hard to make everything perfect because we can't control everything in the world.
It is impossible that a work of art to be perfect. Nothing in the world is perfect. Art usually makes from imagination or experiences of artists. They usually put themselves onto the works and normally all of human's life have different backgrounds. They may do the works as perfectly as they can. But it is not perfect in the real life.
Everyone seems to agree, for somewhat similar reasons, that fictional stories pretending to be historical fact can still be valuable so worth telling.
DeleteIn contrast, there seems to be some disagreement about whether a piece of art can ever be perfect. I expect that Num agrees with Nice that "Nothing in the world is perfect," but I'm not sure that everyone else does — Phing, for example, seems to think that at least in some ways pieces of art and other things can be perfect.
What do you think? Can anything in the world be perfect? Can a work of art ever be perfect?
A Japanese ruler's story in the article might be real or not real; however, we should continue to discuss about the concept of the story since it can give a prospect attitude toward lives. Especially, for the next generation because the story can teach them to find a positive side even our lives are faced the hard time. it just like a story of a servant who broke the beautiful bowl and the Japanese ruler still can see a repaired bowl as a beautiful bowl.
ReplyDeleteNothing in life are perfect so does an art.
I agree and like P'Num idea because it easy to understand and it succint, because it have example in her paragraph.
DeleteI agree with you that this story is quite optimistic which is good. After reading your opinion, I had changed my mind. I like your point that we can learn about a prospect attitude toward lives by this story.
DeleteThere is a famous story of how Isaac Newton discovered his theory of gravity by being hit on the head by a falling apple one day. This story is almost certainly false. Similarly, the story that tells us how the Japanese tradition of repairing broken pottery with gold began 500 years ago is probably not true. This raises the question of whether we should tell and talk about such stories. I think we should because even the stories are not true, they tell us something useful about human nature or about the value of things. In the case of the founding story of kintsugi, we learn that beauty, and a poem, can calm normally angry people. In the story about Isaac Newton, we are reminded that accidental events can play a major role in great success. I think it's important to know whether the stories are true or not, but even if we know they are false, that does not affect the stories' ability to tell us something useful. The same seems to me true of the stories that religions tell: they are often not true, but they can still teach something valuable. In fact, today I watched the NetFlix series "Queen's Gambit," which is complete fiction, but it still says truths about the nature of addiction, about human psychology, and about overcoming obstacles, in addition to other worthwhile ideas.
ReplyDeleteCan a work of art ever be perfect? My first idea was that it cannot be, but after thinking about it a bit more (I had an advantage, because I started thinking about this last week), I've changed my mind. Since a work of art has a limit to its excellence, some specific works must approach closely enough to be called "perfect" - the mathematical notion of limits used in calculus was very helpful here. For example, I think that Jane Austen's novel "Pride and Prejudice" is perfect: I can think of no change that would not make it a less perfect work of art. Also, the etymology of the adjective perfect is a Latin from a Latin verb that means "complete", and I think that "Pride and Prejudice" could not be more entirely complete; it is, therefore, a perfect work of art.
And my comment above is not perfect: as I read it again just now, there are at least two typos in language caused by writing quickly and not having time to review and correct. I don't think they are serious, but they might annoy readers, especially the one in the last sentence, which occurred because I changed my mind after starting to write the sentence, and forget to delete a couple of words. But I don't think that Jane Austen's perfect novel suffers from any such mistakes — she clearly edited her novels very carefully before sending them off to her publisher to publish for the world to enjoy.
DeleteI think that we should not argue on that story because it isn't reliable. First, the dubious story might not represent any Japanese culture anymore. In case It’s a fake story, it might not be written by the Japanese. The stereotype is the thing that should be careful.
ReplyDeletePeople have different standards especially when people evaluate art pieces: therefore, art can be perfect for someone easily and doesn’t mean anything for someone. For example, a son's drawing is perfect for his dad.
I prefer Phing opinion about art rather Peter's idea because I believe that people have a different standard and understanding toward art. You may heard the phrase that "What is art?" This phrase has variety answers. I have to admit that I also not sure what art is, so how art will go closer to the word "perfect". Beautiful is an individual perception, so art can not be perfect.
DeleteNum, what do you think about Phing's response to Pun's comment above, where she suggests a work of art can be perfect for someone? Is the child's drawing perfect for the father?
DeleteBut I like the idea that we need to think about what art is. It is a very complex question. Art is one of those words that we all use all the time, but which is extremely difficult to define in a satisfactory way. But I'm not sure how serious a problem this is. Whatever definition someone uses, can't they say that according to their preferred definition, some work is in fact perfect? I have a definition of art that tells me that Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice is perfect. Phing might have a different definition of art, but still think that some piece of art, such as a child's drawing, can be perfect according to her definition.
I also thought that the definition of the adjective perfect is something we need to worry about, something that I think Phing's repl to Pun's comment also suggests.
To reply to Phing and Num a little more: one of the recent books I've read is The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution. This 288 page book by philosopher Denis Dutton is basically an attempt to define what art is, and it's not the first book devoted to that aim. As his subtitle suggests, Dutton thinks that a good definition of art must take into account our evolution over the course of millions of years, long before our ancestors even became the species that we are today.
DeleteI agree with Phing's opinion that "People have different standards especially when people evaluate art pieces". This is an important sentence because people usually have different believes, opinions, and experiences which refers to what people gives value about it.
DeleteI think we should give a consideration on these kinds of stories, as they can provide some background information. In the story of Japanese ruler, we can see that how an original idea germinate. Although the story may be untrue, but it allows us to understand the abstract concept.
ReplyDeleteI think a work of art doesn't have to be perfect. Before we think about a perfect work of art, we could step back and think about what is to be perfect. In my owe experience, people usually see 'perfect' in different ways. For example, someone may think that simplicity is perfect. In contract, someone might think that luxury is perfect.
Emma, as I note in reply to Num above, I agree with you that we need to talk about the definition of the adjective perfect. I like your two examples of different ways this might be seen, but what is your preferred definition? What do you think is means to say that some work of art is perfect? And is it possible for any work of art to be perfect, or only "perfect for" someone, as Phing says in her reply to Pun above?
Delete