The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment.
Real talent or true talent is developed achieved through persistent hard work and determination. A talented person must always be acknowledged no matter what time it is and who or how the person is. A person genuinely good at something must deserve the acclamation for the hard work he has put in and must be universally appreciated. The same applies to this topic, a person who has faced hardships in life and has overcome the challenges must be given equal appreciation at the time of his death or even in the future.
Let us consider the example of a famous musician and composer AR Rahman. The stage which he has reached today is achieved through his meticulous hard work and passionate love for music. The person had no background in the industry and had to work hard to mark his position and presence in the line of music. Needless to say, the musician is still alive with his work being avidly appreciated and his compositions creating a sensation in the music industry as always. Although with such fame, he has always received honest assessments throughout his career, including the ups and downs he faced in his career. His humble behavior and an open mind have been the biggest asset in his career. He never took criticisms in his life as letdowns and always aspired to learn from people's assessment of his music.
Similar is the case of the renowned Beethoven who gained equal appreciation and applause for his work during his life as much as he got after death. His fame was due to his music and not due to his life or death. His fame and eminence were due to his passion and excellent work of musical compositions which had no parallel competition and which was the best of its kind. There are some others who gain attention due to a musical family background in the industry. But there are always exceptions to everything and these cases are just a few instances of such examples.
To conclude, in my opinion, a person's fame does not interfere with honest assessment in most of the cases. The people in society are well-experienced and good enough to judge the talents of the entertainers. Especially, in the field of music, it requires years of resolute practice and dedication to reach the pinnacle. Real talent always remains unique to a person and always finds a way to come up and the fame of a person plays no role in acknowledgment of talent.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-03 | Gbangbala Usman | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-28 | Gnyana | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | Jbrachael | 66 | view |
| 2023-08-05 | Ataraxia-m | 62 | view |
| 2023-08-05 | Ataraxia-m | 50 | view |
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company According to a recent report from our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any ot 58
- Some believe the more comforts a society provides the more likely it is to create people who cannot provide for themselves Others believe such comforts are indicative of a society s selfs sufficiency 50
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment 58
- Governments should offer a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition 62
- It is better to work as a team than as an individual to succeed 85
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 461, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[3]
Message: The adverb 'always' is usually not used at the end of a sentence.
...ng a sensation in the music industry as always. Although with such fame, he has always...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 31, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...mples. To conclude, in my opinion, a persons fame does not interfere with honest ass...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 469, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ys no role in acknowledgment of talent.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, still, well, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 27.0 14.8657303371 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1964.0 2235.4752809 88% => OK
No of words: 418.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.6985645933 5.05705443957 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52162009685 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72372387251 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 215.323595506 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.49043062201 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 621.9 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.8899660084 60.3974514979 51% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 98.2 118.986275619 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.95 5.21951772744 37% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230386823616 0.243740707755 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0734966320504 0.0831039109588 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.058161653329 0.0758088955206 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139038877794 0.150359130593 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0508737726271 0.0667264976115 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 14.1392134831 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.98 12.1639044944 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 100.480337079 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.