TOEFL Prep Online. 5 Day Free Trial:
Practice TOEFL with this complete practice writing test. There will be two questions, just like on the TOEFL. You will have 20 minutes for the first question, and 30 minutes for the second. Good luck!
Try the complete PrepScholar course:
TOEFL Writing,TOEFL Writing practice,Writing practice test,Integrated task,Independent task,Complete writing practice test
Lene Clara de Melo dos Santos says
Task 1 – Integrated Task
The article and lecture both deal with whether a painting is from Whistler or not. Whilst the author supports the idea that the painting was created by Whistler providing three major reasons, the lecturer opposes the author’s claims. In his opinion these ideas do not hold water.
First, the author mentions that the recent painting depicting a woman in a white dress that was found is from Whistler. This is because just three years after Whistler’s death a close friend of his held an exposition showing Whistler’s productions. He adds that his friend was convinced that the painting was indeed painted by Whistler. The lecturer challenges this idea by saying that even though the painting was attributed to Whistler, the Whistle’s show held by his friend exposed different paintings from different authors. Thus, the painting could have been from another painter.
Second, the author states that the painting looks similar to previous works from the artist depicting the woman in a dress. In his statement, he says that the painting has features that resemble the latter style of the artist, with monochromatic colors being portrayed. The lecturer, on the other hand, explains that the woman represented was actually a model that posed to a broad spectrum of artists in the period. Additionally, the monochromatic painting was not a characteristic exclusive of Whistler’s work, many different artists used it as well.
Finally, the author affirms that even without any signature from Whistler, the painting was from him because it has a butterfly in the corner, a distinctive mark from Whistler. The lecturer, on the contrary, claims that the butterfly was completely different in format and color and it was placed in a different position than Whistler past work. Furthermore, he points out that the painting was probably rigged, seeing that it seems that the butterfly was added after the painting was already finished.
Task 2 – Independent Task
There is no shortage of opinion on whether it is better to have many friends or small groups of friends. From my perspective, having narrowed groups of friends is the best option and I feel this way for two main reasons.
To begin with, I think that a smaller group of friends can form a strong support system. When I was young, I used to have many friends and I always wanted to be accepted by everyone and be universally loved. Then, I would try to please everybody around me, so they could say that I am a nice person to be around with. Conversely, they were never really supportive with me, they were just benefiting from my willingness to do things for them and avoid conflict at all costs. Fortunately, as I grew older, I realised that what truly matters when it comes to relationships with friends is to build meaningful connections and have people surrounding you that are going to be holding your back regardless of the circumstances that you face. I truly believe that small groups of friends can perform it better since you are more likely to develop a stronger bond with them. My own experience is a compelling example of this. During my period of university, I was able to build up an incredible friendship with outstanding people who were there for me in my darkest moments when I was going through depression. Although I had great relationships with many people, I just considered a few as trustworthy friends.
Second, I think that by cultivating meaningful relationships with a selected group of friends, you can be happier. All of us, human beings, want to be loved and understood, which is a universal need that is perpetuated in people all over the world. When we can share in a truthful way what we are dealing with at a certain moment, when we can be ourselves and convey our message without masquerading what we really mean, then we achieve a strong connection. Hence, I would rather have a few friends with whom I can spend marvelous time with and open up freely than have many people surrounding me who would not be there for me when I need. Additionally, while in a larger group of friends the likelihood of developing this level of connection is low, having few friends really boosts this measure. As my mother says, quality is better than quantity and I guess it can be applied in human relationships as well. I can feel deep enjoyment when I have some friends who have been sharing a lifetime with me and I feel strongly connected with this group of people. Furthermore, by having a few friends you can appreciate the value of friendship, enhancing the chance of long-lasting friendship.
Matilda Matilda says
How possible write 20 -30 minutes about nothing?
تفاصيل Tafaseel says
Friends are important as family .We need them during our life to support us .Some people prefer to have a few friends .Nevertheless, some people prefer to have a lot of friends like me. I prefer to have a lot of friends for many reason, I will mention two of them in this essay.
The first reason is that having a lot of friends is going to have a lot of benefits, particularly in leisure time. When some friends are busy doing their jobs and their families, others are willing to spend their free time with you .For instance, last summer, when I wanted to travel to the Caribbean Islands, a large number of my friends apologized for going with me. However , that didn't stop me from traveling because I had many friends, so I found someone to share my journey with me .
I'd rather have friends from different careers. That will give me a chance to gain different experiences .For example, I am saleswoman, but one of my friends is a doctor .She always tells me everything about her job, what the new ,which hospital is the best .It looks like I have a free lesson in medicine every time I meet her .I have a carpenter, tailor, teacher, hair style an engineer and an engineer .All of them, talk with me about their job, so I have a lot of information about everything without needing to pay for that.
In summary, the presence of friends in our lives is very important. You may need them to spend an enjoyable leisure time, or you may need them to expand your intellectual and professional knowledge Whatever the reason for having friends in your life, their number is important because it makes you have many choices
تفاصيل Tafaseel says
The lecture and the reading are both about the famous painting "White Symphony." The author believes that this painting belongs to James McNeil for three reasons. But the lecture disagreed with what the author said.
Above all, the author mentions that this painting was shown by James's close friend after his death, which means that it was better to determine whether this was a James board. On the other hand, the lecture doesn't think that this is a sufficient reason, especially since this painting does not carry the signature of James.
Second, the author stated that this painting follows the James approach. He was used to monochrome. But the lecturer asks this argument that most James' time painters use the same material.
Finally, the author asserts that James always drew a butterfly on top of his canvas. In this panel, the butterfly is drawn in the upper left. The author thinks this is good, but the lecture thinks that this is important evidence that means that this painting doesn't belong to James
AY Vocals says
Wish me luck mine is coming soon
Recently, there have been many debates about the famous painter in America ‘Whistlers’ painting’. More specifically, regarding the passages, the writer puts forth the idea that one of the paints of Whistler now is hanging in the private museum collection all around the world. In the listening passage, the lecture quickly points out some serious flaws in the writer’s claims. In fact, the professor believes that the evidence does not show that this portrait belongs to Whistler and addresses, in detail, the trouble with each point made in the reading text.
First and foremost, the author states that after three years of Whistlers’ death, one of his friends puts his picture in London’s painting exhibition. Whistler’s friend organized this exhibition. Some professionals in the same field, however, stand in firm opposition to this claim. For instance, in listening, the professor argues that this evidence does not elaborate that this portrait belongs to Whistler. He says that his friend puts Whistlers’ painting in the exhibition just because he owned his picture.
One group of scholars, represented by the author, believes that this woman, by long white dress, looks like the same women in the Symphony in White paint. He used the same style as Whistler and the same monochromatic palate. Moreover, he used the same color as black, gray, and whites. Of course, not all experts in the same field think this is accurate. Again, the speaker explicitly addresses this point when he insists that this woman in the picture was a famous artist modern in this year and the monochromatic palate style was papular at this time.
Finally, the author suggests that this picture does not show the signature, but he usually draws a small butterfly in his painting corner. Furthermore, the butterfly in this picture is in the lower right corner. Not surprisingly, the speaker takes this point with the claim by contending that the butterfly in this picture is different because the butterfly is up the left corner; consequently, this painter is not for Whistler.
To sum up, both the writer and the professor hold conflicting views about the evidence of the Whistlers’ painting. It is clear that they will have trouble finding common ground on this issue.
No one can deny that there are positive and negative aspects of deciding to make a lot of friends and what kind of friend is a postulate. It is a critical decision in our lives. If I were forced to choose, I would definitely opt to agree that having plenty of different friends. It is my firm belief that this decision will be beneficial for several reasons, and I will develop these ideas in the subsequent paragraphs.
First, making lots of friends is better than a few friends for the life cycle because humans’ lives are changeable depending on ages. All people should have new friends at every age, for example, when a person is in elementary school has any kind of friends, and when it goes to college, all the friends are changing. I have to admit that my own experience has profoundly influenced this matter. Seven years ago, I lived in Iraq; I have been a group of friends since I was a lawyer; furthermore, I moved to Eygpt to study for a master’s degree in law and made a tremendous friend in the university. Ultimately, I moved to the United States, which is I have to make new friends. For these reasons, I assert that when I am getting old, I have to get a new friend moreover, I love all my old friends, and still, I am keeping in touch with them.
Second, more friends are better than a few friends because of help. Having many friends helps with a different type of circumstance. For instance, when people go to college, they should have to make friends study with them or under any phenomena. I am drawing from my own experience. I want to make a long story short. Three years ago, when I came to the United States, I vividly needed to make a friend because, in a nutshell, I have not known to speak English, and I was super shy; fortunately, I met with some friends in my neighborhood. Predominantly, they helped me to came out of my shell and taught me how to go to college to learn a new language. It is undoubtedly clear to see why having a massive amount of friends is useful. However, if I had not made new friends in this country, I would not have learned English.
In light of the reasons mentioned above, I believe every person has to have plenty of friends for lives changeful and different events. Besides, many friends potentially help a person for solving a problem in any circumstance.
Lucia Montes says
Friendship is a fundamental component of live and is important to our own personal development. Some people think that is better to have lots of different friends than it is to have just a few friends, however personally I believe that is better to have just a few friends for the following reasons.
First of all, I think the quality is better than the quantity. Having a lot of different friends does mean better friendship. I believe that is better to have a small circle of close friends who share common interest and thoughts than having many friends and don’t know them very well. For example: When I was in high school I had many friends and everyone wanted to be with me, however everything changed when we slip after graduation and everyone had different interests.
Second of all, having just a few friends helps to create deepest friendship and trust bonds. This helps you to realize who you can really trust. For example: When I was in college one of my friends run away from her parent’s house because of the problems and immediately came to see me and told what have happened. She trusted in me to tell me all that delicate situation.
Furthermore, if you have few friends you can organize more activities that matches everyone schedules. It is always good to plan a short road trip or get way from the city for a weekend. For example: Once me and my best friends planed once to go to the lake for the weekend and it was easier since all our schedules matches perfectly.
Besides that, if you have few close friends you can be sure they will be there in important moments of your life and will have your back to support you in any situations. For example: all my best friends were with me for my university graduation, they gave me flowers and teddies. Also, those same friends were at my grandfather funeral to support me and my family in that hard moment.
In conclusion, I believe that having few friends is better because you can create deeper trust and friendship bonds. You can sure you can rely on this person and know they will be there to support you in the good and bad moments. After all, friends are the family you choose.
Any suggestion? thanks!
Marco velasco says
MY ANSWERS, COULD YOU TEST IT?
We have a problem about this great artist, generally, the people think that some of his paintings were not done for him, is a discussion about the origin or autor of the paintings,
due to a close autor´s friend, showed some paintings saying that these, are originals, but these are not originals, creating a big discussion about this.
First, when he painted, his paintings looks like with a espeficically characteres aboout it, for example, a buttlerfly in the corner of the painting, colors used and style
or tecniques in the painting, thanks for that, is easier identify a painting done for him. All of these characteres we can look in the painting "Sympony White".
Second, against with the first point, the people say that is very simple copy the "style" or the Characteres of the paintings, thus, lie about the origin of the painting and
autor is not very dificult. A good sample of this is, there was a painting whitout autor´s sing, but, it had the butterfly in almost the same location, but thanks to a good observation, was descovered that
the butteflys that the autor put in his paiting, should not be in that corner, rather in other corner. Whit this evidence, they arrived on this clonlussion.
I agree with the statement, I have lots of different friends, I think that is better because thanks that, I have a better ideas, opinions, thoughts and diffent points of view
compared with have a few friends.
For example, my friends and I, in the last meeting, were talking about the school and the homeworks, a few friends of mine, thought that these homeworks and this sistem of education, have no a lor of importance, due to
some of they thought that is unnecesary learn, or more especific, memorize alot of somethings, they thinks that this is waste time whit useless information , and the profesor´s test need this. In the other and, my others friends and I think that this is important,
no only memorize book´s information, rather learn and analize is better for us, because we do not know when we are going to need this information in our daily live, for us is better being ready for anything. We expleined this to other friends, then, some of them, changed theirs opinions.
Another example, I needed help with a problem whith my computer, I do not anything about computers, so, I called my friend that is an expert in computers and he came to help me. When i have a big problem, ever i call to my friends and they help me, and I help them if they need me, not only
in the computers topic, too in others topics that we know. These situacion would have not possible if I only have a few friends, because is probably that we know about one or two topics but no more.
If I have only a fwe friends, we can not able to find our weaknesless, have a lot of differents firends is the best way to find mistakes in our thought, activities or works, we can take adventage of this thanks to the diferrents
experiences and information.
RICHA GUPTA says
Please review my essay
The reading and the lecture are both about a painting in the exhibition exhibited by Whistler’s friend. The author claims that the painting was made by Whistler before his death. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the author by giving reasons that there is no evidence proving that the painting is made by Whistler.
Firstly, the author believes in Whistler’s close friend who held the exhibition, who was sure that it is Whistler’s work in the painting. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that, the painting which his friend used in exhibition is accompanied by many other artists’ paintings, so he might be the owner of the painting and just displayed it with other paintings.
Secondly, the writer suggests that the lady in the painting resembles a lot with an original painting by Whistler and there was use of the same monochromatic colors, which Whistler used in one of his paintings. Against this argument, the lecturer said that painting could be done by some other painter as the lady in painting was a famous model of that time, hence this is not a proof that the painting is done by Whistler. Moreover, many painters in that era used same kind of monochromatic colors in their paintings.
Lastly, the author posits that, the painting had sign of butterfly on right side which was used by Whistler instead of his signature. Against this point, the lecturer said that the butterfly on the painting is different in shape and colors which Whistler generally used in his own painting. Additionally, the painting has butterfly on the upper right corner which is not a place used by the Whistler in his paintings. And also, the butterfly in painting is forged because it was painted later after painting displayed in the exhibition
Whistler was a famouse painter from the XIX century, who has paintings all over the world in museums and in private collections and became very famous for his painting called "Symphony in white", where appears a woman with a white dress and was sold for millions of dollars. On the reading and the lecture, they both talk about how an unofficial white dress painting is or not from whistlers early painting. (66)
The writer believes it is because of how it is painted, with the same monochromatic scale of colors and and the famous butterfly, which he used to paint in all of his paintings on a corner of its, also, a friend of him, exhibited in a collection with lots of his paintings and attributed to him. (55)
Acording to the records, the lecturer believes that not, the painting is not his because, that same woman who appears in the painting and that it is relationed to whistlers paintings, appears also in a lot of other passages, mostly because she was kind of famous; also, the monochromatic scale of colors that he used to use was also really popular at the time; and to conclude with the well known whistler´s butterfly, is believed to not to be his because it was in other corner and thought to be painted afterwards the paintng was finish just to make money when sellling it (104)
Marianna Parenti says
Both the reading and the lecture discuss about the attribution of a painting to the well-known artist James McNeill Whistler. The author of the reading believes that Whistler is the original painter and provides three arguments to support his opinion. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts the hypotheses made by the author and states that there is no evidence to prove the author's claim.
To begin with, the author argues that after Whistler's death, the painting was exhibited in London together with other works by one of Whistler's closest friends.This means that he considered him the original author. In opposition, the lecturer points out that, according to records, that show inluded the works of various artists. Hence, he rebuts the hypothesis of the author.
Secondly, according to the reading, the woman portayed in the painting resembles a woman represented in one of Whislter's masterpieces, "Symphony in White". Moreover, these two paintings show the same monochromatic palete. However, the lecturer emphasises that that woman was a really common subject at that time. In fact, the same woman appears in a lot of artworks by different painters, as well as the monochromatic palete.
Lastly, the author contends that the painting shows a small butterfly on the right lower corner. This would prove that it belonged to Whistler because he used to sign his operas in this unusual way. In contrast, the lecturer states that the butterflies that appear in Whistler's artworks are different in shape and color. Moreover, he used to paint them in the upper left part. Hence, the lecturer believes that someone may have added the butterfly subsequently in order to increase the value of the painting.
Ivonne Hoyos says
I like this writing exercise, I compared my answers and it went well! 🙂
Wish me good luck! I'm going to have the test tomorrow…
Himanshu Sharma says
i would like to get some feedback ,
The writer of the reading passage and the lecturer of the listening part, both share their opinion on the mysterious painting which is believed to be of James Mcneil Whistler. The mysterious painting has a young lady in a white dress painted which resembles with whistler’s painting: ‘Symphony in White’. However, the writer and the lecturer have contradictory opinions. The reading passage showcases evidence supporting the fact that the painting belongs to whistler and the lecturer opposes its specific points.
Firstly, the lecturer describes that the painting gallery organized by Whistler’s friend in 1906 had artistic pieces from other artists too. He displayed all the famous paintings at that time. This means that the painting might belong to any other artist rather than Whistler.
Secondly, the lecturer opposes the points about the painting style expressed in the mysterious painting described in the reading passage. The reading passage infers that the black and white theme of the painting is similar to that of Whistler’s most famous paintings: ‘Arrangement in black and white’. The lecturer, on the other hand, says that monochromatic plates, the lady in the white dress and the black and white theme all were very popular styles of paintings at that time. This implies that the painting might belong to any other famous artist at that time
Lastly, the lecturer describes that the butterfly which was painted in the mysterious painting was not a sign of whistlers painting as it differed in size, shape, and color. Moreover, the butterfly was painted at the upper left side instead of the lower right side of the painting. The lecturer also states that this evidence implies that the real painter of the described painting is trying to prove that the painted is painted by whistler.
In conclusion, the lecturer has some considerable facts which effectively proofs that the mysterious painting might belong to some other artist rather than James Mcneil Whistler.
Nihan ÇOPAN says
Couldn't we see the transcript during the our writing time?
Nang Lin says
Both the reading and the listening are discussing about the paint that was done by Whistler,very famous American painter. The reading gives three proposals that were assumed to be Whistler's early work. However , the lecturer argues the reading passage.
First, the reading states that the exhibition that was shown in London was attributed by Whistler's close friend. Therefore, it could be assumed that this painting was done by Whistler. On the other hand , the lecturer refutes this point by saying that it was not only Whistler's paintings were showing in that exhibition, there were various paintings were shown in that show. That's why it could not be assumed that , this painting was done by Whistler.
Second, the reading mentions that the woman in that painting is very similar to the woman in "Symphony of White" that was done by Whistler by using many blacks, gray and white. Nevertheless, the professor opposes this point by saying that the woman was appeared in many different paintings not just in that painting she was very popular in that time. In addition, the professor states that the blacks, white and gray colors are very popular and it could be used by the other painters at that time.
Finally, according to the reading ,although the paint was not singed by Whistler, there was a butterfly in its lower right corner. However, the professor argues that point and he said that it was very different in shape and color that Whistler used in his painting. Moreover, the professor said that Whistler usually put this butterfly in upper left corner and it could be added later to give the idea that was done by Whistler.
As seen , the listening opposes the points made by the reading.
Jiajia Lam says
The sample answer for question 2 is too bad to be a sample answer! No offense but It can’t be a standard TOEFL test sample answer
Hallumi Adel says
The reading and the lecturer are both about an argument that if a painting is in fact Whistler's work or not.Whereas the author of the reading states that this painting is Whistler's paint, the lecture suggests that it is not.the lecture casts doubt on the main points made in the reading by providing three reasons.
First of all, according to the reading, the painting was included in an exhibition of painting in London which organized by one of Whistlers close friends, and after Whistler's death he attributed the painting to whistler.However the lecture disputes this point by saying that it is not an evidence that it is Whistlers work.furthermore the lecture says it could be that the organizer of the exhibition had a number of paintings to show, and he showed it because he owned it.
Secondly, the reading states that the woman in the painting resembles the woman in one of Whistler painting 'symphony in white" in addition the reading states that the painting used a lot of blacks, gray, and whites which is the colors that Whestler would use in his most famous painting.nevertheless, the lecture refutes this argument.it argues it is not a clear evident because the woman in the painting is a famous model that were painted by a lot of painters, it also points out that whit, black, and gray colors used by numerous painters in the same period when Whestler was painting.
Finally, the reading claims that that the paint had Whestler sign which is a small butterfly on the corner of the painting. On the other hand, the lecture believe that it is a fake sign.it also thinks that the sign were added to the paint after Whistler finished the paint. Moreover, the lecture feels that the butterfly that was in the painting located in the right corner of the paint, but Whestler used to sign his paint by potting the butterfly in the top right corner of the paint.
Mathieu SU says
Hi, can someone rate my writing please, the writing exercice is the most difficult for me I think.
The article is about painting, in the following lecture we say that an anonymous painting was shows and we don’t know who painting it because there is no signature.
To begin, the anonymous painting was attributed to Whistle, a well-known painter. One of he’s closest attributed the painting to Whistle because they were a lot of similitude with, he’s achievement. For example, the women on the painting is very similar to one of he’s achievement named “Symphony in White”. Furthermore, the colors used was the same colors used by Whistle, a monochromatic palette which include black, gray and white. There is also one major argument that can show this achievement was done by the master, the butterfly on the corner, sometime the latter don’t use signature and instead us the butterfly as it.
Nevertheless, on the reading every argument was moved on. He gives a lot of explication about these similitudes; a lot of painter can actually draw the women on the painting. Indeed, this model was very common, so this is not a proof. Furthermore, the monochromatic palette was also used quit often by painter and the major anomaly was the butterfly wasn’t draw on the upper left corner which was strange because Whistle usually draw the butterfly at this place.
Therefore, the author of this achievement is still a mystery and we can just imply that was draw by Whistle.
hamais ahsan says
The author states that, though the painting that is found is not signed by Whistler but it still belongs to him and provides 3 reasons for it. However, professor explains that this argument is weak. Also, this painting could have belonged to anyone because the evidence provided is not clear. He refutes each statement made by the author.
First, writer states that, in 1906 this painting was part of an exhibition that was organized by his friend. It happened 3 years after whister’s death. Speaker opposes this statement and says that the exhibition had numerous other paintings. The only reason it was part of the exhibition was the fact that it was one of many other paintings that his friend owned.
Second, author avers that women in the painting resembles “Symphony in White” which every one knows was made by Whistler. Professor contends this statement and says that many other paintings also feature female that look like the one in “”Symphony in white”. In fact model in the painting was very famous at that time and many artists used her in their paintings. In addition, use of black and white color does not mean that painting belongs to whistler. Mono tone color was in fashion those days and painters used these two colors mainly in their drawings.
Third, author posits that the painting has butterfly in the corner instead of signatures. Speaker disagrees with the author and states that butterfly argument is not convincing at all. Butterfly that is included in the painting is of different color and shape. Moreover, usually butterflies that were part of Whistlers painting were in lower right corner. In contrast, this painting has it in the upper left corner. Also, after scrutiny it was found that butterfly was placed on the painting many years after it was made. Clearly, this shows that someone tried doing forgery with this painting.
Abc Cba says
Please rate my writing
The article claims that the painting found recently is from Whistlers early life. The author provides 3 reasons for it. However, the lecturer disagrees and refutes each of his three reasons.
First, the reading avers that the painting was included in the 1906 exhibition which was held by Whistlers close friend. So, it is a clear indication that it belonged to Whistler. However, the professors rejects this statement. He explains that the records show that Whistler’s friend owned paintings from different painters. The exhibition was not jus dedicated to Whistlers paintings and had paintings of various painters. Therefore, the painting could have belonged to any of the other painters.
Second, the article states that the woman in the painting resembles the woman that was in Whistlers other famous painting “Symphony in white”. However, the lecturer rebuts this argument. He explains this by stating that the women drawn in the painting was a very famous celebrity and was depicted in various other paintings by different painters. In addition, the professor also rejects author’s opinion that the painting resembles Whistlers style of monochromatic palate. He asserts that grays, blacks and whites was a general trend in that time and a lot of painters followed that style.
Finally, the author posits that even though, the painting is not signed but the butterfly in corner is a trademark of Whistler. To the contrary, the lecturer contends this prerogative. He states that the original Whistler’s paintings have the butterfly on the lower right and not the lower left. Furthermore, evidence shows that the butterfly was added to the painting later on and is an act of forgery.
FLAVIA DINIZ says
There are different times in life when we meet many different people. Some of these people become your close friends; some of them only remain as distant colleagues. Some people think that it is better to have friendship with many different people, rather than have fewer friends. In my opinion, having a smaller group of friends is much more enriching than knowing many different people. That is because having a smaller group of friends is more advantageous for nurturing the friendship, as well as is more productive in order to create a deep connection with people whom we have more in common with.
In many occasions in our lives, we are bound to meet many different people, depending on the places we go, our job environment, the interactions we have in parties, our social lives. It is very normal that we create a sense of identity with some of them and get closer to these peers. They eventually become our small group of people, which is very magical, because we can nurture the sense of friendship, visit each other, organizing parties and barbecues. Having a small group of people allows us to being able to see each other more frequently. This fact is much more difficult when we have a bigger group of people, that, in most of times, does not hold the same connection with us, since it is very hard to create a connection with many different people. It is also very hard to organize meetings when there are so many people involved. Therefore, in terms of possibilities to properly nurture a friendship, it is much better to have fewer friends.
As a second point, it is much better to have fewer friends, and actually closer ones, rather, than knowing a bunch of different people that, in many times, you cannot even call them “friends”. Having fewer friends means that you are able to sense the feeling of connection with this people, with whom we identify. In my life I have met several people, but the vast majority became only colleagues or people that I have seen, or have barely spoken to. But there are a group of three friends that remained very important to me and whom I can consider being my friends. Although we have differences, we share many points of view, and when we are together it is always fun, relaxing moments and we feel very distracted and in good mood when we see each other. This means that I have fewer friends, but they are closer to me, and I feel that I can truly rely on them If I ever face hindrances in life or setbacks. I can count on them to offer me comfort and counseling. This is often very hard to find in many different people, and even if you have this bigger group of people, it is hard to create connection with.
In conclusion, having fewer friends, rather than many different ones, is much better in terms of nurturing a rich and meaningful friendship and creating deeper connections with people whom we identify with. Having many different friends does not mean that these friendships are established, and it is more likely that the great number of friends or colleagues hinders the possibilities of nurturing stronger bonds that are very important for our mental health nowadays.
FLAVIA DINIZ says
The set of materials discuss the controversial issue whether a painting of a woman in a long white dress is a piece of art that belongs to James Whistler´s early works, a famous American painter. Although the article presents three reasons to state that this art was indeed painted by Whistler, the lecture objects to each of the three reasons presented.
First, the article states that this painting was exposed in an exposition organized by a Whistler´s close friends. The fact that his close friend decide to use the painting as one of whistler´s work proves that the painting in fact belongs to Whistler. The lecture, however, opposes to this and affirms that this is not an enough evidence to prove that the painting is part of Whistler´s work. Because in this exposition there were various other paintings that belonged to many other artists, and that were all collected and exposed together. It is very likely, thus, that this close friend owned the painting and decided to include it in the exposition, just because he already had this painting.
Second, the article states that one fact that proves that the painting belongs to Whistler, is that the art style, as well as the woman presented in this painting, they all resemble Whistler painting style. The lecture refutes this by saying that many painters, by that time, used similar color on their paintings and the woman painted in this art piece was actually a popular painting model of that time, having appeared in a lot of other author´s paintings. Therefore, the presence of the woman and colors in the paintings don´t prove that the piece of art belongs to Whistler.
As a final point, the reading affirms that, although the painting is not signed by Whistler, there is a presence of a small butterfly on the right corner of the painting. This is a clear indication that the painting is an actual work that belongs to Whistler, because he is known for using this butterfly in many other paintings, as a different form of signature for his works. The lecture, however, rejects this by saying that the butterfly that usually appears in Whistler paintings are located on the upper left corner, instead of right corner. Furthermore, it is very likely that the butterfly in this painting was added later, being a type of forgery, in an attempt to make the painting looks like a Whistler´s work.
AnotherAnonymous Girl says
While the passage states that James was one of the American famous painters and his work of art was his, especially the "Syphony In White" where a young woman appears in a ong white dress, the lecture expresses a different point of view.
First the author of the reading feels that the exhibition of his supposed painting was done in London. Actually it was organized by his old-close friends, and his friends recognized this painting to be his. However the lecturer challenges the claims made by the author and he asserts that this show was dedicated not only to him but to the other famous painters. His friends included this painting only because they own it.
Second the article mentiones that the woman resembles the "Syphony In White''. To paint his work of arts he used the same monochromatic plates. Actually, in the lecture it is clearly stated that a lot of painters use the monochromatic colors and this is a not clear evidence that these belongs to him. Also this woman appears in lots of his works.
Third, in the reading passage, James used a butterfly as a signature. However the lecturer points that this butterfly is not convincing. First because it has different shapes and colors and second he used to paint it on the right side, but in the actual painting is on the left side corner. Additionally he says that this siganture was added after a long time the painting was made and it is not a clear evidence that this belongs to him.
To sum up, both the reading and the lecture gives three pieces of evidence to support their ideas.
Gabriela Fernandes says
Today’s people are fully superficial about friendships. The argues that our needs and desires must be shared with many people is on the surface of the human’s behavior. This essay will be argued by the argument that I disagree with the type of question.
To begin with, we are following the rules of the technology, such as social media, the internet and the crowds of the new away to communicate. To be in the group’s middle, we need to post every little action we did daily. This behavior brings to you many different people around you, which will follow your steps and sometimes write to you. That is unhealthy, in the background, the socialization became sad and depressed, because people who do not feel achieved the goals of it, will feel alone and without real connections.
In addition, people desire real friends and reliable ones. Rather than have thousands of “friends” who you do not know the struggles of them, it is much better to be friends that you can go to their homes. For example, if you are sick, only a real friend will go to the hospital see you, whether they have their own routine of work or studies. Real friends are there for everything. A few friends to go to your house to eat pizza and play games with you is better than talking with many people by the smartphone.
In conclusion, I do believe is useful to have just a few friends, where you can share your struggles, happiness, and spaces. The belief of different people around makes you a friend of all or “popular” is wrong and would become the person with anxiety, depressed, scaling up the feel that you are alone.
Gabriela Fernandes says
The reading and the lecture are both about the famous American painter Whistler. The author of the reading claims he did a painting, but the lecture expresses a different point of view.
To begin with, the author argues that a close friend of Whistler after his death, did an exhibition in London where attributed an art made by the painter. The article mentions a similar art called ‘Dress White’ that he made to compare it. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer who states that is not evidence to prove he is the author of the art. He claims in that time the style was similar to paint’s Whistler, his friend put the same collection style, and include other painters.
Secondly, the writer suggests the colors of “Symphony in White”, had the same monochromatic palette of his paintings. This is supported by the claims that the palate among grey, white and black was used often by Whistler. In the article, it is said that time the colors used by him were popular fashion used by other painters, not being able to give evidence to prove the real author of it.
Finally, the passage argues that the authorship does not sign his paintings, instead of that he was used to making a small butterfly as a signal, and the paint that the friend included at the exhibition had the little animal. In contrast, the lecture’s position is that the butterfly has other shape and colour, and he used to draw it on the left side, but the painting was on the right. He notes that someone could be trying that looks like he did when does not the art.
The article claims that the recent painting that was found to be as similar as the “symphony in white” was thought to be another work by James McNeill Whistler, a best-known painter in his generation. The author provides reasons of support. However, the professor refutes each of the author’s arguments. He states that the claims by the author are not strong to be considered as evidence.
First, the reading passage states that one of Whistler’s close friend organized an exhibition which he considered the painting as Whistlers, but the professor contradicts this view. He states that it is true that Whistler’s friend includes the painting in the exhibition but that doesn’t mean it’s his. Meaning, it is possible that the painting was work made by the man who organized the exhibition. Furthermore, the professor says that the exhibition features many artists works and Whistler is just one of them.
Next, the article claims that the recent found painting clearly resembles the woman in “Symphony in White”. However, the professor disagrees by stating that the woman in the painting is popular artists in her time, which means that the woman appeared a lot in other paintings. The professor also claims that the monochromatic palate was also used by others not only by Whistler.
Lastly, the reading passage averts that Whistler often painted his artwork with butterfly as his authorship which the professor opposes. He states that this claim is totally different from shape and curve. He explains that the said painting had the butterfly at the lower right while Whistler often paint his authorship at the upper right corner which likely shows that someone forged the painting to make it look like it’s his work.
285 words – finished exact 20mins
why no conclusion? — not necessary
Dmitrii Kulikov says
The reading and the lecture are both about whether or not newly discovered painting belongs to Whistler. The author of the reading feels that this work is his indeed. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the writer. He is of the opinion that this famous artist did not create this piece of art.
To begin with, the author argues that this painting was exhibited in 1906, 3 years after the painter's death, in London by Whistler's close friend. The text mentions that this fact legitimizes the attribution of this work to the famous artist. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that the presence of the canvas at the exhibition does not prove its origin. Additionally, he says that the man hosting this event was showing not only Whistler's works but all the pieces he had.
Secondly, the writer suggests that the woman depicted resembles the model from "Symphony in White". In the article it is also said that the style of this artwork resembles Whistler, who used monochromic palate. The professor, however, rebuts this by mentioning that the woman in white was a popular artistic trend those days. He elaborates on that by bringing up the point that also the monochromic palate was widely used at that period of time.
Finally, the author posits that Whistler actually signed his artwork, but by a way that is very specific to him. In the passage it is pointed out that a small butterfly was put in the corner of the canvas. In contrast, the lecturer's position is that this mark is of shape and color that is completely different from Whistler's manner. He states that this sign is also placed in the lower right corner, while the famous painter usually put it in the upper left one.
Modern life is very stressful, so it is really important to have some friends to get relaxed and refreshed during the holidays. That is why we should carefully approach our choice of people. Personally, I believe that having many social contacts is not beneficial. I feel this way for two reasons which I will explore in the following essay.
First of all, a big number of friends means a large amount of time spent on social activities. To maintain any relations, we should dedicate some pieces of our lives to these people. If we are not discrete about this, we may find ourselves wasting time here and there compromising our academic and working performance. My personal experience is a compelling example of this. A couple of years ago, I studied at the university in another city. I have never had many friends, but when I started to attend this place, I accidentally gathered many people around me. However, that was very unusual and even uncomfortable to me, so I did not really know how to approach every one of them. Once, one of my companions, named Sergey, all of a sudden asked me for help, while I was preparing for the exam, which was the very next day. I helped him because I did not want to lose any of my social contacts. As a result, I failed my test, and nobody of the so-called fellows did not give me the helping hand. Since then I have been very cautious about my social time management.
Secondly, we share our friend's problems. No doubt, we try to choose the most successful individuals to befriend them, but that not always works out. If our fellow makes a mistake, we try to help them and maybe take the blame sometimes. Events like that may occur at work, and they may put us in danger of losing employment. For instance, when I was at high school, I worked at a shop to get some money to buy a new phone. I have never worked before, so I had not any experience of how to maneuver at the workplace to stay out of trouble. However, I was very careful and polite to give a good impression of myself. On the other hand, my workmate, named Zhenya, who was also an old friend of mine, did not do so great. He tried to stay out of any work and put all the responsibilities on my shoulders. Once a customer visited, and he was very picky, and unfortunately, Zhenya was the cashier while I was absent. To make a long story short, our boss fired Zhenya and me because my old friend was not very polite and careful.
In conclusion, I think that numerous friends may harm my well-being in many ways. This is because they require time to be spent with them and because they often get in trouble and expect me to take the blame as I am their companion.
Meenu Sethu says
Can you pls check my integrated essay?
The reading and the lecture discusses whether or not a painting was one of James McNiell Whistler’s. The author of the article believes that the painting should have been Whistler’s and suggests three points to support his standpoint. However, the lecturer argues on each of those points with valid countless arguments.
To begin with, the author states that the painting should have been Whistler’s as it was hung in one of the exhibitions which was organized by Whistler’s close friend. The lecturer casts doubt on this point. He mentions that the art exhibition included various other collections too. So, he suggests that this particular painting could have been owned by the organizer.
Next, the article posits that the woman in the painting resembles the woman in “Symphony in White”. On the other hand the lecturer counters this statement. He explains that the woman is a popular figure and that she has posed for various other painters of the same period.
Finally, the article declares about the butterfly in the corner of his painting. This point is again challenged by the lecturer. He advocates that, the shape and size of the butterfly differs. Moreover, the butterfly is usually found in the upper left corner of the painting whereas this painting had it in the lower right. In fact, he mentions that the butterfly should have been included to the painting much later to that of the painting. He claims that this a forgery art, as someone wanted to make it look like Whistler’s painting.
Baongan Hovu says
The reading and lecture both discuss whether the painting of the female in white belonged to James McNeill Whistler, the famous American artisan. While the author of the reading provides three points to support the affirmative, the lecturer challenges the views made by the author.
Firstly, according to the article, the aforementioned artwork was deemed Whistler’s work as it appeared in an exposition held by Whistler’s close associate. The professor, however, casts doubt on the point made in the article as the show ,at the time, displayed numerous works from different artists. The lecturer argues that the spoken painting was owned by Whistler’s companion, removing the claim that it was done by the renowned artist.
Another point raised by the author of the reading is the connection between elements in the said oevre with those in Whistler’s work. Particularly, the character in the aforesaid drawing shared features with the one in Whistler’s artwork, “Symphony in White”; its monotone palette also reflected “Arrogant in Grey and Black”, which was among Whistler’s recent creations. This point again is made irrelevant by the professor as he states that the composition could be done by another painter contemporaneous to Whistler. The professor specifies that the woman within the masterpiece along with the use of monotint shades were constant objects of inspiration for the creative community at the time. Therefore, the argument for the correspondence to Whistler’s imaginary approaches is weak to the professor.
Finally, the author of the reading contends that the abovementioned masterpiece bore Whistler’s signature mark – a butterfly at the bend of the canvas. The lecturer once again finds himself in disagreement with this idea. He establishes that the design and position of the butterfly was strikingly different from that on Whistler’s original work. Moreover, it is believed that the butterfly motif was embedded after the discovery of the said artwork. Thus, the lecturer puts forth the idea that painting itself was a counterfeit model of Whistler’s pieces.
vaishu rao says
Both, the Reading and Lecture are discussing regarding the discovery of a
painting exhibited in London by James whistler's friend, which is supposedly claimed to be one of the early works done by James Whistler who is one of the best known and most important american painters of era (1834-1903) .
Base lining the affirmations and evidences, reading confirms it to be early works of James whistler as the latest found painting resembles the widely known painting of James whistler " The Symphony in white ", while the Professor precisely contradicts the reading statements with the corresponding counter articulations saying painting is merely attributed by his close friend to be work of whistler's but has no evidence and arguments made for the same are not that strong
Foremost, Lecture opposes the attribution of painting to be whistler's by
emphasizing that exhibition is organised by whistler's friend himself, so there can be probability that he is showcasing other painting's to be whistler's work or including other's work as whistler's . Hence, professor gainsay this as no evidence
second,Lecture contest the reading by saying, Painting with women was Popular epitome and
model of that time so it can be anybody's painting ,additionally he summons lots of whites, blacks, and grays along with monochromatic palate was used by Whistler's but so does by other painters of past era ,and this serves to be zero proof to claim it as whistler's painting
Third ,authorship signature style of whistler – "The butterfly ",professor says is no match in authenticity ,shape and color with Whistlers butterfly and he adds Whistlers has always painted butterfly in the bottom right corner contrarily it is on top left corner in newly discovered painting and and is no strong evidence to claim
Lastly , Professor summaries conclusion by saying that – after close examination of the painting it is found that it is one of latest works, it is likely to accept painting to be an absolute forgery made by other painters to be appearing as Whistlers
Azat Tashkulov says
Please, rate my integrated writing))
The lecture and the reading are both discussing discovery of the unsigned painting. While the reading states that the painting was done by Whistler even though there is no any signature of him, the lecturer refutes this and saying it could be done by anyone.
First, the reading states that the painting was in an exhibition which was organized by Whistler’s close friend. The painting was considered to be Whistler’s work and attributed to him. However, the lecturer argues that the painting was not Whistler’s work. He states that according to the record, exhibition did not include only Whistler’s work but there were other collections work of diverse painters and the painting could be added to exhibition because his friend merely possessed it
Second, the article claims that there is a woman who resembles of work in “Symphony in white” by Whistler and monochromatic palate was used in it with lots of black and grays which Whistler applied in his most work. The professor refutes it by saying it could be done by anyone. He states that at that time the woman was prevailing to be drawn and she appears in many different paintings, on top of that monochromatic palate was common of that time and applied by lots of painters.
Third, the reading says that even though the painting was not signed by whistler, there is an evidence of the small butterfly which he used in his paintings. However the lecturer opposes it that the butterfly that whistler drew was different size and shape, in addition, the butterfly was located on the lower left part of the painting whereas Whistler drew it on the upper part of the painting. He feels that the painting was merely fake
Relaxing Hub says
my typing is v. slow ….. what should i do???…??
Integrated task number 1
The lecturer counters what is stated in the reading passage by giving various reasons. He starts by saying that while it is not a painting made by Whistler it is very similar work to the one that Whistler made, in this case “Symphony in White”.
First, it is known that one of Whistler’s close friends hanged the painting in a museum in London. The lecturer counters this by pointing that the exhibition where the painting was hanged included lots of painting by various artists and that is not a strong evidence to follow.
Second, it is mentioned in the reading passage that the resemblance in the painting with the woman in “Symphony in White” is another evidence that this painting could be Whistler’s . The lecturer, again, counters this by acknowledging the fact that the woman in the painting was very popular at the time and lots of artists drew her.
Third, the passage mentioned that another reason that this painting could be Whistler’s is because there is a butterfly painted on the lower right part of the painting, and that if Whistler didn’t use his signature in his paintings he used a butterfly instead. The lecturer discards this with a very strong reason, he states that Whistler used to paint the butterfly in the upper left corner of the painting, then he added that the butterfly was later determined to be painted in another time by someone trying to make it look like whistler. He concluded his opinion by saying that the butterfly did not resemblance the ones that Whistler used to paint.
Deciding who will be your friends is a tough decision. Some people may prefer having lots of different friends while some may prefer to just have a few, in my personal experience I prefer having just a few close friends. Due to the fact that it is difficult to fully trust someone, I believe that personal life and personal matters shouldn’t be discussed with everyone.
In the social spot it is well known and said that having lots of friends may be beneficial in a long term. However, I strongly believe that having a smaller but strong circle of friends presents more advantages than having a big but weak circle of friends. I believe this because if you are in need of discussing your personal problems with someone it is much better to do it with just a few people rather than with a big group. That way you can ensure that your business won’t become a social gossip for the rest of the social spot.
It is hard to find people that will connect with your thoughts, way of thinking and opinions. If you befriend people that don’t agree with your thinking, they may go against you with others to contradict your opinions, they can also try to trick you into changing your thoughts on several topics just so they can accept you in their social group. While is it not a crime to have a big group of friends, I recommend to be close with only just a few friends that you trust.
I remember some experiences were I lost several things I was working on thanks to the envy and bad comments that I received when I told lots of friends that I had, thinking that they were people that would support me in everything I did.
Matthew Nelson says
The article states that the painting of a lady in white dress is Whistler's work eventhough it doesn't have his signature on it, and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor says that the argument wasn't strong enough and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading states that three years after Whistler died, his close friend included Whistler's painting of the lady in white dress during the exhibit. The professor refutes this point. He states that the painting only has same style as Whistler's and that it doesn't mean that the evidience is passed by Whistler's close friend. He also states that the show is not only of Whistler's art work but it was the man's collections which means that the man owns the art work and not evedently done by Whistler.
Second, the article states that the painting resembles Whisler's other painting called " Symphony in White". However, the professor says that the subject of the said painting often appears in other artists paintings as well. He also states that black and white painting wasn't Whistler's trade mark, hence monochromatic style is so popular in his time that other artists use it too.
Third, the reading claims that the painting gives evedince of his authorship, which is a tiny butterfly drawn in his paintings. The professor says that the butterfly in the painting wasn't convinving that it was of Whistler's. He states that the butterfly in the painting has different shape and color and is located on the right side, however, Whistler's paintings have butterfly marks on the upper left. He explains that, probably the butterfly is fake and it was added after acquiring the painting to make it look like it is Whistler's work.
Dağhan Yıldız says
I'll be taking my TOEFL test tomorrow. Please feel free to criticize.
Friends are some of the most important influences on our lives and their impact on us shapes the way we think, act and speak. Therefore I agree that having lots of friends is more important and better than having just a few, as long as one is careful while choosing who to be friends with since they can also affect us in bad ways. I am going to elaborate the reasons behind my opinion after I discuss the some advantages of having less friends.
First of all, having less friends means you have more time to spend with each of them, therefore you get to know them better. Of course having close friends is always nice, because they really know your personality and you know theirs, you have mutual interests and you always know that they will be there through your toughest times. However, that does not mean you cannot be close with your friends if you have a lot of them. On the contrary; the more friends you have, the better chances are you will find a friend who you will feel most close to.
Secondly, having lots of friends can give you many opportunities in life. You gain much more experience in that every person has a different personality and you can learn about life and people when you have more acquaintances.
Furthermore; when a person has plenty of friends, he/she can get more support during his/her rough times. You can know you have many people around you that will support you no matter what the circumstances are. Besides, they all contribute to your self-development as well as you do to theirs.
To summarize; friends are undeniably significant elements of everyone’s life, regardless of their number. However, having lots of friends instead of just a few can be more advantageous and beneficial for a person. Nevertheless, one should be careful while making friends, for friends can also be harmful influences as well as they can be supportive.
Kamesh Mantha says
Hi I have written one of the Task- 1 Could you please review and let me know What do you think about this Writtting Task
Speaker Opposes points mentioned in the Passage & begin with by saying that the paintings are not done by the whistler and it may be done by another painters.
The Next point the Speaker says that the painting exhibition was organized by the whistler friend, it was organized with other paintings and he might have owned this painting hence it was placed in the exhibition.
Next Continuing in the sameway, the speaker went on to say that as stated in the passage that it was done by the whistler but speaker said that there is no evidence that the painting was done by the whistler. It might be done by the someone and they made it look like painted by whistler. He also made another point is that butterfly is on the bottom right corner and whistler when he painted, he used to be painting the butterfly on upper left corner, butterfly is not looking like whistler has did that.
Hence speaker went on to say that this painting was not done by the whistler, it was done by someone else and made it look like the whistler
Isaac Nuñez says
thanks!!!! you've been so helpful to me
Preeti Khandat says
Thank you so much i had a good analysis about how i was managing and writing. Now i have little confidence in this section.
sait tan says
The reading and lecture are both about ‘’ symphony in white’’, which is one of the most famous painting that painted by James Mcneill Whistler who lived between 1834-1909. The author of the reading believes that the painting painted by whistler. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that there is a few reason that the painting is not belong to whistler.
First of all, author points out that one of his close friend exhibited this painting after he died.it makes possible the painting belongs to whistler. The point challenged by the lecturer. He says that there was many painting except symphony in white in the showing of his close friend in London. Moreover, he says that maybe he was only own it.
Secondly, the author contends that the woman style is too resembles to whistler’s paintings. The lecturer rebuts this argument. He suggests that it could painted by another painter who lived the same time with whistler.
Finally, the author states that whistler was signing on right below of his painting. This sign was a small butterfly. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that. He puts forth the idea that the painting had butterfly sign too. However, this sign was on the upper left and it had totally different shape
Riad Yag says
Please help me! My test is in 5 days, can someone correct my work?
The reading and the lecture are both about an anonymous painting and his author identity. While the text provided three arguments in favor of the painter Whistler as the author, the professor refuted every point by pointing out facts that go against this idea.
First, people should not get the wrong idea of the painting belonging to Whistler’s work because of its presence in a close friend show. In fact, it does not mean that Whistler painted it, as the art exhibition was composed of several wide others paintings from other different painters. Moreover, there is no clear evidence because Whistler died three years prior to the exhibition.
Then, regarding the subject of the work: the woman, which is supposed to look like his famous later work “Symphony in white”. This resemblance tends to make people think of it as early work from the painter. However, at that time this woman was a frequent representation, depicted by other artists of the same period. As well as, the monochromatic palette of grey and white colors used in the painting. Painters of that period were under the same artistic influence and they worked with a narrow range of colors.
Eventually, although the painting showed butterflies in the bottom right corner as a potential signature. Expertise determined that the butterflies were added to the artwork after it was done and even the shape and the colors used did not match Whistler’s butterflies. Assuming, that Whistler’s habit of signing his painting with butterflies was well known. Someone else could have done it to imitate the artist to frame people. Indeed, the butterflies’ location in the painting was not the same than Whistler’s used to do it. He usually put them in the left upper corner.
The professor used all these arguments to highlight his opinion about the anonymous painting author attribution, clearly rejecting Whistler to be a possilibity.
Natalie Red says
Please, comment if any mistakes…
In the lecture, the professor made several points about the painting with young women in white dress. The professor claims that this painting isn't from the famous American painter Whistler. However, the reading contents that it is high likely to be his painting due to similarities with his work. The professor made number of points that are contrary to the reading section.
The first point that the professor uses to cast doubt on the reading is that there isn’t strong evidence about the painting, because on the exhibition where this painting appeared were many works from authors of that time and they were very similar. However, the reading states that this painting had many characteristics of his famous “Symphony in white”, where is young lady in white dress too. In addition, the painting was put into the exhibition by close friend of Whistler. But the professor claims that this technique and type of painting was very common at that time. This point indicate that the originality of this painting is in doubt.
Next point that the lecturer uses to cast doubt on the reading is that the butterfly which is on the painting had different shape. Moreover, it was add on the work after the painting was already done. In addition, the butterfly is on differed place. However, the painting states that it was the same style and the butterfly was typical sight of Whistler's work. This point is contradicted by professors arguments about the butterfly.
To sum up, the points from the lecture contrast with the reading. The evidence from Whistler’s friend about the painting is very weak and there were many artists at that time with similar paintings which demonstrate that the reading is in doubt.
can anyone review my essay.
the reading and the lecture are both about the painting of a young woman in a white dress. whereas the author of the reading states that it might be his early work ,the lecturer suggest that there is no evidence to prove that it was his art. the lecturer cast doubt on the main point made in the reading by providing three reasons.
First of all , according to the reading in 1906 after the death of the whistler his friend conducted a exhibition in Landon. he included one of Whistler's painting . however the lecture disputes this point .he says that no evidence was included in the painting to show, it was organized by the Whistler. furthermore, the exhibition was not only for Whistler's painting but there were many other who included their artistic innovations for the exhibition.
Secondly, the reading states that the women in the painting resembles the one in the" symphony in whites" , style was similar but it is not well developed .he used the monochromatic palate black, grey and white .nevertheless the lecturer refutes the argument. he argues that the lady in the art was a popular artist of those days and thus many others also has her painting. and the monochromatic colors was popular those days.
Lastly, the reading claims that there was no sign in the art but has a painting of small butterflies in the corner which was also his style. On the other hand, the lecturer believe that the butterfly was in the right corner and of different size and shape, in his painting he use to have it in the top left corner.
In conclusion, although the reading and the lecture are both about Whistler's painting. the three main points made in the reading are effectively challenged by the lecturer
Wajd Zeidan says
The article states that the artwork that contains the woman wearing a white dress belongs to the artist James McNeill Whistler, and provides three reasons of support.
However, the professor explains that it doesn't belong to him anymore ,and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First , the reading claims that the artwork was presented by one of his closest friends ,which makes it clear that this painting is considered to be Whistler's work.
The professor refutes this point by saying that the painting exhibition included artworks by many other artists ,he states that being presented by his close friend doesn't mean that it belongs to Whistler .
Second, the article posits that the woman in the painting clearly resembles the woman in ' Semphony in white ' which was painted by Whestler.
However, the professor says that that woman was a popular artistic model in that time , who was painted by many other artists. According to the professor , containing a same model doesn't make the artwork belong to Whistler.
Third, the reading says that the artwork contains a butterfly on its lower right corner, and Whistler used the butterfly signature in his paintings instead of using his own signature on them .
The professor opposes this point by explaining that the butterfly on that painting was different than the ones that are done by Whistler ,we also learn that the butterfly which was signed by our artist had used to be placed in the upper left corner not the lower right one ,which makes it unlikely that this painting belongs to Whistler.
i have my toefl exam one week later ,wish me luck !
Santiago Emilio Rocha Montoya says
I would really appreciate if someone rates my writing: Second Essay: Some people tend to think that having a vast number of friends would make them popular and better human beings, indeed they would be recognized by many people and would have a big social circle to interact. But the important question about friendship is if this friends are actually considered real friends.
To have many friends has its pros and cons. By having a big range of people to interact you can get different points of view in life aspects. Furthermore by having a large number of friend you can have a great social life by assisting to different types of reunions, meetings, events and so on. But by having so many friends it would be really hard to build a strong relationship with all of them, as a consequence this friend would dissappear in a short time and if the person havent constructed a real conection with someone he could end being alone, as no one from the big range of friend ended up being an actual friend.
Contrasting a big number of friends, people who try to make a small social circle tend to build deeper connections and créate strong links with friends that could last for many years or even for a lifetime. The famous TV series “How I met you mother” serves as a clear example of what a small circle of friends is, and how it would last for a life time. In the show, the main carácter (Ted) has a circle of 5 people, where they find discussions related to any daily aspect that could be presented, but in through all the show, they maintain together and they never split up completely, going through all thei problems together and creating a strong connection in their small group.
The main concern of a person is not if they are able to make a great number of friends, the proper rule to choose them does not have to be the quantity, it has to be the quality of those connections made.
Santiago Emilio Rocha Montoya says
I would really appreciate if someone rates my writing: First Essay: The lecture refutes completely the arguments presented in the passage. At first, it was thought that the exhibition was organized by someone who was Whistlers friend, and that the paintings shown in the exhibition were only paintings of Whistlers. The lecture opposes this argument by saying that the exhibition was not exclusive to Whistlers paintings, there were different paintings that corresponded to the same period artists, and that the painting was presented in the same place did not show direct evidence that the painting was painted by Whistler. The second point described argued that the painting used the same style as Wistlers paints, indeed the painting looked alike with an early painting signed by Wistler, but the same style was commonly used in that time; monochromatic scales were used and the woman painted was a popular image and model for the paintings. The third and last argument implies that the butterfly painted in the corner of the painting was a signature used by the artist, he used to sign with a butterfly in the corner of the painting, but the butterfly that appeared in the discussed painting was not placed in the actual corner that Whistler used to place it, actually the lecture assures that the butterfly in the painting was a posterior attachment made to the painting in order to argue that it was an authentic Whistler.
Brian Ll says
THE SECOND ESSAY:
Having friends is a crucial part of everyone’s social life. With them we can do or share our activities, talk about things we don’t with our parents and having a good time overall. It depends from person to person if they would like to have many friends than being in a small circle. In my opinion having many friends is better for some reasons.
Being a teenager may help you create many groups of friendship. This has happened to me by being part in different clubs in school, extracurricular activities and community work. The benefit is that I can absorb information from different friends that have different viewpoints. This way I have become open minded and I always see things from different perspectives before I can create my final opinion on a certain topic.
Second, if people stick with just 2 or 3 friends you can later be disappointed by their behavior or arguing about an unimportant topic which may lead to small tiffs afterwards. This has happened to me to and we have connected again but our friendship was not the same anymore. Another possibility is that some friends may move out somewhere else and seeing them in a regular basis can be difficult.
Even though many people say the quote “quality over quantity” that does not help a lot nowadays. I have friends in my school and I discuss with them for topics related to technology and computers in general. The problem is that they are not into the sport I love at all so I practice with friends that are obsessed with it. This way they motivate just by feeling the desire they have to improve.
To sum it up, having strong relationships with fewer friends is good but having many friends has much more benefits for a person’s personal development. People may argue with these arguments because it can be seen as using friends for interest, but in reality this can be applied from everyone, even for those who have 2 or 3 friends because this is how human nature is built.
Brian Ll says
Can someone review my essay? My test is in 4 days.
The passage talks about a very famous American painter called James Whistler, saying that most of his paintings were done later in his life. It mentions that recently was discovered a painting of a woman in a long white dress similar to one of his other works. The reading part gives 3 arguments why it is Whistler’s painting even though it wasn’t ‘signed’ by him. The lecturer contradicts with all the points mentioned with detailed information.
First, he says that in the exhibition there were other paintings done from other authors but it was a Whistler’s friend who organized it, that’s why he considered the painting as Whistler’s work. In the passage it says that Whistler had done another similar painting with this one that is being discussed.
Second, the painting could be a work from other painters because the woman in the painting was a very famous model at the time he was alive. The lecturer added by saying that the colors used in the painting, gray and white, were used a lot by other painters too.
Third, the small butterfly that Whistler used to ‘sign’ was always in the right upper corner of the paintings he did, while the butterfly on this work was on the upper left. This may lead to a lot of doubt because the butterfly could have been added later by others in order to make the painting one of Whistler’s work.
Kritika Singh says
The passage is trying to establish a recent painting of a woman in white dress as one of Whistler’s early work. The lecturer is arguing that none of the passage details certify painting to be his work.
First, the author states that inclusion of painting in an exhibition three years after Whistler’s death by his close friends is an implication that they considered it to be whistler’s work. The lecturer however is of opinion that inclusion of painting in the exhibition organized by his close friends is no evidence that the painting was also drawn by him. He further says that the show included various paintings from their collection and it could have been drawn by someone else.
Second, the author supports his argument by identifying similarity between woman in the painting with woman in “Symphony in white” which is one of whistler’s early work. The lecturer contradicts this by stating that painting could have been work of other painters of those time as the woman in the painting was popular at that time. He also explains that monochromatic palate usage in both the paintings mentioned in passage is also because it was common at that time.
Third, the passage is associating the small butterfly in the corner of the painting with the image whistler used in his paintings instead of signatures. The lecturer negates this by telling about the difference in shape and colour between two butterflies. Also, lecturer enlightens us further by saying that whistler used to put butterfly at upper left corner not in right corner as in this painting.
Can someone review ?