2. 职称英语
  3. Extraordinary creative activity has been characterized as revolutionary, flyi

Extraordinary creative activity has been characterized as revolutionary, flyi

游客2023-12-17  38
问题    Extraordinary creative activity has been characterized as revolutionary, flying in the face of what is established and producing not what is acceptable but what will become accepted. According to this formulation, highly creative activity transcends the limits of an existing form and establishes a new principle of organization. However, the idea that extraordinary creativity transcends established limits is misleading when it is applied to the arts, even though it may be valid for the science. Differences between highly creative art and highly creative science arise in part from a difference in their goals. For the sciences, a new theory is the goal and end result of the creative act. Innovative science produces new propositions in terms of which diverse phenomena can be related to one another in more coherent ways. Such phenomena as a brilliant diamond or a nesting bird are relegated to the role of data, serving as the means for formulating or testing a new theory. The goal of highly creative art is different: the phenomenon itself becomes the direct product of the creative act. Shakespeare’s Hamlet is not a tract about the behavior of indecisive princes or the uses of political power, nor is Picasso’s painting Guerniea primarily a propositional statement about the Spanish Civil War or the evils of fascism. What highly creative activity produces is not a new generalization that transcends established limits, but rather an aesthetic particular. Aesthetic particulars produced by the highly creative artist extend or expliot, rather than transcend that form.
   This is not to deny that a highly creative artist sometimes establishes a new principle of organization in the history of an artistic field; the composer Monteverdi, who created music of the highest aesthetic value, comes to mind. More generally, however, whether or not a composition establishes a new principle in the history of music has no bearing on its aesthetic worth. Because they embody a new principle of organization, some musical works, such as the operas of the Florentine Camerata, are of signal historical importance, but few listeners or musicologists would include these among the great works of music. On the ether hand, Mozart’s "The Marriage of Figaro" is surely among the masterpiece of music even though its modest innovations are confined to extending existing mens. It has been said of Beethoven that he toppled the rules and freed music from the stifling confines of convention. But a close study of his composition reveals that Beethoven overturned no fundamental rules. Rather, he was an incomparable strategist who exploited limits -- the rules, forms, and conventions that he inherited from predecessors such as Haydn and Mozart, Handel and Bach -- in strikingly original Ways. [br] Which of the following would most likely follow the final sentence of the passage?
选项 A、In the similar manner, several modern composers successfully established musical conventions.
B、Similarly, the succeeding generation of composers manipulated accepted musical foms.
C、In contrast to Beethoven, however, even great modern composers like Bela Bartok did not attempt to alter accepted musical conventions.
D、Musicologists are continuing to study the compositional styles of composers in order to determine whether their contributions have been innovative.
答案 B
解析 该题问：下面哪一句是可能接在文章最后一句之后的？B项意为“同样，下一代的作曲家巧妙地处理了大众所接受的音乐传统”。这可从最后几句讲到贝多芬如何创造性地运用了现存的音乐规则、形式和传统中可看出。本文结构使用的是承上启下的段落关系。A项意为“同样，好几个现代作曲家成功地建立了音乐传统”，这和文中内容不协调；C项意为“和贝多芬相反，甚至伟大的现代作曲家像巴尔陶克(1881～1945年)匈牙利作曲家和钢琴家)都不想改变公认的音乐传统”，这不对，因为本文开始讲的是创造性科学和创造性艺术的差别，然后讲艺术创造性的特点，是针对科学创造性特点而言，再说贝多芬并没有改变公认的音乐传统；D项意为“音乐研究家正在继续研究作曲家的作曲风格来确定他们的贡献是否是革新的”，此种说法不对，见C项解释。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3280619.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)