2010英语一text1

  Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage. Not only have many newspapers done away with their book-review sections, but several major papers, including the Chicago Sun-Times and the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, no longer employ full-time classical-music critics. Even those papers that continue to review fine-arts events are devoting less space to them, while the “think pieces” on cultural subjects that once graced the pages of big-city Sunday papers are becoming a thing of the past.

  It is, I suspect, difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century, including Virgil Thomson’s The Musical Scene (1945), Edwin Denby’s Looking at the Dance (1949), Kenneth Tynan’s Curtains (1961), and Hilton Kramer’s The Age of the Avant-Garde (1973) consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their erudite contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.

  We are even farther removed from the discursive newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared. In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered.1 Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men (for they were all men) believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. “So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism,” Newman wrote, “that I am tempted to define ‘journalism’ as ‘a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are.’”

  Why, then, are virtually all of these critics forgotten? Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England’s foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored. Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists. How is it possible that so celebrated a critic should have slipped into near-total obscurity?

  21. It is indicated in Paragraphs 1 and 2 that

  A arts criticism has disappeared from big-city newspapers.

  B English-language newspapers used to carry more arts reviews.

  C high-quality newspapers retain a large body of readers.

  D young readers doubt the suitability of criticism on dailies.

  22. Newspaper reviews in England before World War 2 were characterized by

  A free themes.

  B casual style.

  C elaborate layout.

  D radical viewpoints.

  23. Which of the following would shaw and Newman most probably agree on?

  A It is writers' duty to fulfill journalistic goals.

  B It is contemptible for writers to be journalists.

  C Writers are likely to be tempted into journalism.

  D Not all writers are capable of journalistic writing.

  24. What can be learned about Cardus according to the last two paragraphs?

  A His music criticism may not appeal to readers today.

  B His reputation as a music critic has long been in dispute.

  C His style caters largely to modern specialists.

  D His writings fail to follow the amateur tradition.

  25. What would be the best title for the text?

  A Newspapers of the Good Old Days

  B The Lost Horizon in Newspapers

  C Mournful Decline of Journalism

  D Prominent Critics in Memory

  • 0
    点赞
  • 0
    收藏
    觉得还不错? 一键收藏
  • 0
    评论
Go语言(也称为Golang)是由Google开发的一种静态强类型、编译型的编程语言。它旨在成为一门简单、高效、安全和并发的编程语言,特别适用于构建高性能的服务器和分布式系统。以下是Go语言的一些主要特点和优势: 简洁性:Go语言的语法简单直观,易于学习和使用。它避免了复杂的语法特性,如继承、重载等,转而采用组合和接口来实现代码的复用和扩展。 高性能:Go语言具有出色的性能,可以媲美C和C++。它使用静态类型系统和编译型语言的优势,能够生成高效的机器码。 并发性:Go语言内置了对并发的支持,通过轻量级的goroutine和channel机制,可以轻松实现并发编程。这使得Go语言在构建高性能的服务器和分布式系统时具有天然的优势。 安全性:Go语言具有强大的类型系统和内存管理机制,能够减少运行时错误和内存泄漏等问题。它还支持编译时检查,可以在编译阶段就发现潜在的问题。 标准库:Go语言的标准库非常丰富,包含了大量的实用功能和工具,如网络编程、文件操作、加密解密等。这使得开发者可以更加专注于业务逻辑的实现,而无需花费太多时间在底层功能的实现上。 跨平台:Go语言支持多种操作系统和平台,包括Windows、Linux、macOS等。它使用统一的构建系统(如Go Modules),可以轻松地跨平台编译和运行代码。 开源和社区支持:Go语言是开源的,具有庞大的社区支持和丰富的资源。开发者可以通过社区获取帮助、分享经验和学习资料。 总之,Go语言是一种简单、高效、安全、并发的编程语言,特别适用于构建高性能的服务器和分布式系统。如果你正在寻找一种易于学习和使用的编程语言,并且需要处理大量的并发请求和数据,那么Go语言可能是一个不错的选择。
Go语言(也称为Golang)是由Google开发的一种静态强类型、编译型的编程语言。它旨在成为一门简单、高效、安全和并发的编程语言,特别适用于构建高性能的服务器和分布式系统。以下是Go语言的一些主要特点和优势: 简洁性:Go语言的语法简单直观,易于学习和使用。它避免了复杂的语法特性,如继承、重载等,转而采用组合和接口来实现代码的复用和扩展。 高性能:Go语言具有出色的性能,可以媲美C和C++。它使用静态类型系统和编译型语言的优势,能够生成高效的机器码。 并发性:Go语言内置了对并发的支持,通过轻量级的goroutine和channel机制,可以轻松实现并发编程。这使得Go语言在构建高性能的服务器和分布式系统时具有天然的优势。 安全性:Go语言具有强大的类型系统和内存管理机制,能够减少运行时错误和内存泄漏等问题。它还支持编译时检查,可以在编译阶段就发现潜在的问题。 标准库:Go语言的标准库非常丰富,包含了大量的实用功能和工具,如网络编程、文件操作、加密解密等。这使得开发者可以更加专注于业务逻辑的实现,而无需花费太多时间在底层功能的实现上。 跨平台:Go语言支持多种操作系统和平台,包括Windows、Linux、macOS等。它使用统一的构建系统(如Go Modules),可以轻松地跨平台编译和运行代码。 开源和社区支持:Go语言是开源的,具有庞大的社区支持和丰富的资源。开发者可以通过社区获取帮助、分享经验和学习资料。 总之,Go语言是一种简单、高效、安全、并发的编程语言,特别适用于构建高性能的服务器和分布式系统。如果你正在寻找一种易于学习和使用的编程语言,并且需要处理大量的并发请求和数据,那么Go语言可能是一个不错的选择。

“相关推荐”对你有帮助么?

  • 非常没帮助
  • 没帮助
  • 一般
  • 有帮助
  • 非常有帮助
提交
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值