“Art does not exist unless it is shared; it requires both artist and audience.”
The statement claims that art by itself does not exist. Arguing for an art piece’s existence is not our focus here since existence is objective regardless of a perceiver. Therefore, in essence, the statement posits that art holds no intrinsic value unless it is shared with a creator and an appreciator, none of which is expendable. The claim thus requires two ends to construe an illustration of art. Although the context of which constitutes art is artificial, I still strongly disagree with the statement because I claim that the idea of art is universal, and that is not defined by whether there is a creator of the art piece, nor by whether a human being is on the other end of receiving this art. Eventually, art exists by itself, regardless of homo sapients’ endeavor to epitomize it.
Art, first of all, holds intrinsic value. A creator of art is an entity to which we attribute the creation; yet the definition of an entity is vague. For example, music, the concordance of objects’ reactionary sound wave propagating through a substance, is art in itself without a doubt. If one must limit the creator of music to the universe, I shall assert that music, even in the circumstances which is devoid of any audience, exist in itself as a form of art. The possibility that music shares intrinsic value across species or even disciplinary boundaries has well been proven by scientists — not only does animals enjoy music, but also does the plants, who thrive more prosperous under the influence of music. Here I claim that the existence of its artistic value is objectively extant because of one simple reason that music, a pleasing sound, affects all. Thus my argument is complete in the sense that at least one form of art exists regardless of its condition of sharing.
Secondly, one might attack my argument by pointing out that music, only at the moment it is being perceived, starts to become art. I reply with the definition of art that whatever holds intrinsic value is art. Music, although a concept conjured by humans and what we enjoy is not necessarily globally applicable, roots deeper than our understanding such that any other forms of entity can have their own appreciation of sound waves.
Lastly, art does not necessitate a creator, or in the original words, an artist. Put aside the view that our universe is an entity, we mostly discover the art in nature. Unraveling the mystery of universe has been the center of work for mankind. The golden ratio did not get created, it was existent since the beginning of universe; most of the mathematical beauties are disclosed as mankind advances. I then augment my argument with this statement: art is not definitive by humans; we are only a fraction of art’s audience, and that what constitutes as art has been laid out for mankind, some already dancing on the history of ours, some awaiting its grand debut. Our acceptance or production of art, does not redound to its existence, nor does it impair its intrinsic value.
To sum up, the statement that “art does not exist unless it is shared” is invalid. Furthermore, I believe in art’s inherent value, which can only be realized, not altered by any means.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 98, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t is an entity to which we attribute the creation; yet the definition of an entit...
^^
Line 5, column 871, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...t music, a pleasing sound, affects all. Thus my argument is complete in the sense th...
^^^^
Line 9, column 685, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...awaiting its grand debut. Our acceptance or production of art, does not redound t...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, thus, well, at least, for example, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.5258426966 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 11.3162921348 186% => OK
Pronoun: 52.0 33.0505617978 157% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 72.0 58.6224719101 123% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 12.9106741573 217% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2674.0 2235.4752809 120% => OK
No of words: 548.0 442.535393258 124% => OK
Chars per words: 4.8795620438 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83832613839 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82746803639 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485401459854 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 847.8 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.7629383008 60.3974514979 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.416666667 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8333333333 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.125 5.21951772744 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32898836338 0.243740707755 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109885227065 0.0831039109588 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0926206012661 0.0758088955206 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.217304240382 0.150359130593 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104531825506 0.0667264976115 157% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.1392134831 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 100.480337079 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.