To begin with, the reading passage have has explained that Graffiti artists have faced on many problems such as opposition and criticism.(many problems such as는 빼면 더 깔끔할거 같아요~) It also mentioned that the Graffiti artist often got arrested by the police. In addition to this, the professor agrees with the reading passage. He said says(현재형으로 쓰시는게 좋아요) that Graffiti art can ruin private properties and destroys the neiborhood. He also mentions that this art attributes on increasing the crime rate of a neighborhood.
Secondly, the reading passage said says that graffiti is ugly becasue it ruins private or even public property. On the other hand, the professor's thought was slightly different from this. He gave Christo, the Graffiti artist, as an example. The professor said says that different from other Graffiti artists, Christo is very careful on what he is doing. :The professor says that Christo is different from other Graffiti artists since he is very careful on what he does. Everytime he askeds permission for drawing on the private or public properties. In addition, he only displayeds his work for couple of weeks. After that he through throw the work away and with the material that he disposeds of, he made makes another work.
Lastly, the reading passage suggested to encourage the Graffiti artist by giving them public places that only allow the purpose of drawing Graffiti arts. However, the professor disagrees with this. Instead, he suggested to clean up all the trashes that the Graffiti artists have made as a punishment. Thus, instead of leading them to make more Graffiti art as reading passage suggested, the professor suggested to encourage the Graffiti artists to learn many beautiful arts other than the Graffiti.:이부분은 reading이랑 lecturer랑 의견이 왔다갔다 하는 것 같아요. 교수가 양쪽 사이드의 의견을 다 제시했더라도 정리할땐 한문단에 한가지 의견으로 쓰시는게 깔끔할듯. 글을 읽어보면 교수가 이쪽 사이드도 찬성했다가 저쪽도 찬성했다가 .. 무엇을 주장하는지 알수가 없어요 ;ㅅ; |