题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
The tone of this article would best be described as.
A．informative
B．critical
C．exploratory
D．perplexed
如果结果不匹配，请 联系老师 获取答案
更多“The tone of this article would…”相关的问题
A．their sober tone
B．their usage of the painterly idiom
C．their cognizance of a religious influence
D．their minimalist sensibility
E．their medievalist atmosphere
The distinction between making art and thinking and writing about it
should imply neither a mutual exclusiveness nor a hierarchic differentiation of
these processes. Leonardo demonstrated that producing art and theorizing about
it need not be antithetically opposed activities and that meaningful contributions
(5) can be achieved successfully in more than one field. Inexplicably, few theorists
have built as memorable architectural structures as his and even fewer artists
have been entrusted with the directorship of an influential art institution.
Unfortunately, as theory and practice became more specialized in the modern
era and their operational framework clearly defined both in the cultural milieu
(10) and the educational process, their independent paths and boundaries have
curtailed possibilities of interaction. The creations of categories and divisions
have further emphasized highly individualized idiosyncrasies and, by exposing
differences, diminished the value of a unifying artistic vocabulary. The
transformative cultural process of the last decades has critically examined the
(15) artificial separations between theoretical and studio practices and disclosed
viable connections between making, writing, thinking, looking and talking
about art. The recent dialogue between the various components of the artistic
discourse has recognized the common denominators shared by theoretical
analyses and artistic production, one of which is clearly exposed by the
(20) argument that the central objective of the theorist and artist is to unmask and
understand artistic meanings in painting or text.
The notion that "true" art is the product of individuals who are incapable of
in-depth understanding, in stark contrast to erudite, restrained and controlled
scholars, is an outdated model. The assumption that artists make art but cannot
(25) or do not have to talk or write about it and that theorists rarely know anything
about the creative process, has been consistently refuted by the many texts
written from Leonardo da Vinci to Mary Kelly. Even van Gogh, a martyr of the
stereotypical "misunderstood genius," whose artistic career has been distorted
by scores of films and books, wrote with lucidity and insight about art and his
(30) work. Apparently, the "mystery" of the creative process, jealously protected
by artists but also selectively cultivated by some art historians has been both a
fascination and frustration for those extrinsic to the process and artists have
exposed the intimacy of creativity while acknowledging the role of cognition in
creativity.
(35) Even the ironic and subversive demise of authorship of the post-modern and
electronic age acknowledges, at least indirectly, the value of the artist's
individual participation. However, many contemporary artists have abandoned
the hierarchic segregation of the inner realm of the creator and, by combining
theoretical and studio practices, brought a reconciliatory tone to the processes
(40) of making art and analyzing it. Their works, which are often simultaneously
artistic productions and critique of the artistic discourse, make use of visual and
textual forms to expose the connection between looking and thinking as the
essential attribute to both creating and understanding art.
According to the passage, the specialization of art and theory has tended to
A．reduce the level of control artists have over artistic institutions
B．increase the usefulness of creating a unifying artistic vocabulary
C．permit a greater level of development of knowledge concerning both
D．curtail interactions and establish false boundaries between the two fields
E．complicate the educational process of artists in an unfortunate manner
When, If Ever, Can Museums Sell Their Works？
The director of the art-rich yet cash-poor National Academy Museum in New York expected strong opposition when its board decided to sell two Hudson River School paintings for around ＄15 million.
The director, Carmine Branagan, had already approached leaders of two groups to which the academy belonged about the prospect. She knew that both the American Association of Museums (AAM) and Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) had firm policies against museums' selling off artworks because of financial hardship and were not going to make an exception.
Even so, she said, she was not prepared for the directors group's immediate response to the sale. In an e-mail message on Dec. 5 to its 190 members, it condemned the academy, founded in 1825, for "breaching one of the most basic and important AAMD's principles" and called on members "to suspend any loans of works of art to and any collaboration on exhibitions with the National Academy."
Branagan, who had by that time withdrawn her membership from both groups, said she "was shocked by the tone of the letter, like we had committed some crimes." She called the withdrawal of loans "a death knell (丧钟声)" for the museum, adding, "What the AAMD have done is basically shoot us while we're wounded."
Beyond shaping the fate of any one museum, this exchange has sparked larger questions over a principle that has long seemed sacred. Why, several experts ask, is it so wrong for a museum to sell art from its collection to raise badly-needed funds and now that many institutions are facing financial hardship, should the ban on selling art to cover operating costs be eased？
Lending urgency to the discussion are the efforts of the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles, which has one of the world's best collections of contemporary art but whose funds is said to have shriveled(萎缩) to ＄6 million from more than ＄40 million over the last nine years. Wouldn't it be preferable, some people asked this month, to sell a Mark Rothko painting or a couple of Robert Rauschenberg's legendary "combines" -- the museum owns 11 -- than to risk closing its doors. Finally, the museum announced ＄30 million donations by the billionaire Eli Broad last week that would prevent the sales of any artworks.
Yet defenders of the prohibition warn that such sales can irreparably (不能挽回地) damage an institution. "Selling an object is a knee-jerk (下意识的)act, and it undermines core principles of a museum," said Michael Conforti, president of the directors' association and director of the Clark Art Institute in Williams-town, Massachusetts. "There are always other options."
The sale of artwork from a museum's permanent collection, known as deaccessioning(博物馆收藏品等出售), is not illegal in the United States, provided that any terms accompanying the original donation of artwork are respected. In Europe, by contrast, many museums are state-financed and prevented by national law from deaccessioning.
But under the code of ethics of the American Association of Museums, the proceeds should be "used only for the acquisition, preservation, protection or care of collections." The code of the Association of Art Museum Directors is even stricter, specifying that funds should not be used "for purposes other than acquisitions of works of art for the collection."
Dorm Zaretsky, a New York lawyer who specializes in art cases, has sympathized with the National Academy, asking why a museum can sell art to buy more art but not to cover overhead costs or a much-needed education center. "Why should we automatically assume that buying art always justifies a deaccessioning, but that no other use of proceeds -- no matter how important to an institution's mission--ever can" he wrote.
Even Patty Gerstenblith, a law professor at DePaul University in Chicago kno
A．abundant in artworks
B．expecting strong resistance
C．abundant in money
D．selling three paintings
M: Well, I'd like to think that my past as an artist has been an interesting one thus far. Stylistically there have been a lot of changes; I started out with a chunky organic brush style, very popular that time. Back then when I did my first book, My Dollar, I had a feeling that comments would just be too precious, and I want my work to be bold. I still enjoy working that way. But since then my interests have changed. Half way through my Run on the Little Cat. That's my second series. I move towards a more linear style, which is something I always loved. I've been trying a little variations on things out since then, and now I am trying to push towards a more graphic look. I really loved doing color work.
W: I'd say your works have been fairly eclectic in tone and story, do you agree？
M: Yeah, eclectic is a good word for it. I try to 'take on a project that seems interesting to me, I can't imagine working on just one kind of story for the rest of my life.
W. You are an, for lack of a better term, all-inclusive artist, meaning you usually ink your own pencils and keep your own style, can you stand to be influenced by someone else？
M. I have been influenced by others in the past, and they've all done an outstanding job. It's the nature of collaboration, isn't it？ The thing is now I really enjoy having control over the final look of the art work.
W: What is it about the company that you've given it so much of your time and effort as an artist？
M: It's a very nurturing environment. My editors are all open to new ideas, and have encouraged me to push my abilities and grow. It's a great place to be, and I'm honored they keep renewing my contract.
(47)
A．He writes comic stories.
B．He draws pictures for comic books.
C．He teaches painting in an art school.
D．He compiles comic books with other writers.
The Art of Public Speaking
If you were to tape-record one of David Letterman's comedy routines, memorize it word for word, and stand up before your friends to recite it, would you get the same response Letterman does？ Not very likely. And why not？ Because you would not deliver the jokes as Letterman does. Of course, the jokes are basically funny. But David Letterman bring something extra to the jokes—his manner of presentation, his vocal inflections, his perfectly timed pauses, his facial expressions, his gestures. All these are part of an expert delivery.
No one expects your speech class to transform. you into a multimillion-dollar talk show host. Still, this example demonstrates how important delivery can be to any public speaking situation. Even a common speech will be more effective if it is presented well, whereas a wonderfully written speech can be ruined by poor delivery.
This does not mean dazzling delivery will turn a mindless string of nonsense into a triumphant oration. You cannot make a good speech without having something to say. But having something to say is not enough. You must also know how to say it.
What Is Good Delivery？
Good delivery does not call attention to itself. It conveys the speaker's ideas clearly, interestingly, and without distracting the audience. If you mumble (含糊的说) your words, gaze out the window, or talk in a dull tone, you will not get your message across. Nor will you be effective if you show off, strike a dramatic pose, or shout in ringing tones. Most audiences prefer delivery that combines a certain degree of formality with the best attributes of good conversation—directness, facial expressiveness, and a lively sense of communication.
Speech delivery is an art, not a science. What works for one speaker may fail for another. And what succeeds with today's audience may not with tomorrow's. You cannot become a skilled speaker just by following a set of rules in a textbook. In the long run, there is no substitute for experience. But take heart! A textbook can give you basic pointers to get you started in the right direction.
Methods of Delivery
There are four basic methods of delivering a speech:
(1) reading from a manuscript
Certain speeches must be delivered word for word, according to a well-prepared manuscript. Examples include an engineer's report to a professional meeting, or a president's message to Congress. Absolute accuracy is essential. Every word of the speech will be analyzed by the press, by colleagues, perhaps by enemies. Timing may also be a factor in manuscript. speeches. Much of today's political campaigning is done on radio and television. If the candidate buys a one-minute spot and pays a great deal of money for it, that one minute of speech must be just right.
(2) reciting a memorized text
Among the feats of the legendary orators, none leaves us more in awe than their practice of presenting even the longest and most complex speeches entirely from memory. Nowadays it is no longer customary to memorize any but the shortest of speeches—toasts, introductions, and the like. If you are giving a speech of this kind and want to memorize it, by all means do so. However, be sure to memorize it so thoroughly that you will be able to concentrate on communicating with the audience, not on trying to remember the words. Speakers who gaze at the ceiling or stare out the window trying to recall what they have memorized are no better off than those who read dully from a manuscript.
(3) speaking impromptu (即兴的)
An impromptu speech is delivered with little or no immediate preparation. Few people choose to speak impromptu, but sometimes it cannot be avoided. In fact, many of the speeches you give in life will be impromptu. You might be called on suddenly to "say a few words" or, in th
A．is a comedian
B．is basically funny
C．is of bad manner
D．is an expert
The tone of the author is ______ .
A．imaginary
B．humorous
C．ironic
D．pessimistic
The author's tone is ______.
A．subjective
B．sarcastic
C．indifferent
D．admiring
The tone of the passage is ______.
A．sentimental
B．serious and regretful
C．depressed
D．light yet mockingly serious
