http://gre.kmf.com/question/22b4mj.html

Most recent work on the history of leisure in Europe has been based on the central hypothesis of a fundamental discontinuity between preindustrial and industrial soci-eties. According to this view, the modern idea of leisure did not exist in medieval and early modern Europe: the modern distinction between the categories of work and leisure was a product of industrial capitalism. Preindustrial societies had festivals (together with informal and irregular breaks from work), while industrial societies have leisure in the form of weekends and vacations. The emergence of leisure is there-fore part of the process of modernization. If this theory is correct, there is what Michel Foucault called a conceptual rupture between the two periods, and so the very idea of a history of leisure before the Industrial Revolution is an anachronism.
To reject the idea that leisure has had a continuous history from the Middle Ages to the present is not to deny that late medieval and early modern Europeans engaged in many pursuits that are now commonly considered leisure or sporting activities— jousting, hunting, tennis, card playing, travel, and so on—or that Europe in this period was dominated by a privileged class that engaged in these pursuits. What is involved in the discontinuity hypothesis is the recognition that the people of the Middle Ages and early modern Europe did not regard as belonging to a common category activities (hunting and gambling, for example) that are usually classified together today under the heading of leisure. Consider fencing: today it may be considered a “sport,” but for the gentleman of the Renaissance it was an art or science. Conversely, activities that today may be considered serious, notably warfare, were often described as pastimes.
Serious pitfalls therefore confront historians of leisure who assume continuity and who work with the modern concepts of leisure and sport, projecting them back ontothe past without asking about the meanings contemporaries gave to their activities.
However, the discontinuity hypothesis can pose problems of its own. Historians hold-ing this view attempt to avoid anachronism by means of a simple dichotomy, cutting European history into two eras, preindustrial and industrial, setting up the binary opposition between a “festival culture” and a “leisure culture.” The dichotomy remains of use insofar as it reminds us that the rise of industrial capitalism was not purely a phenomenon of economic history, but had social and cultural preconditions and consequences. The dichotomy, however, leads to distortions when it reduces a great variety of medieval and early modern European ideas, assumptions, and practices to the simple formula implied by the phrase “festival culture.”

In the early twentieth century, the idea that pianists should be musician-scholars whose playing reflected the way composers wanted their music to sound replaced the notion that pianists should be virtuosos whose performances thrilled audiences with emotional daring and showy displays of technique. One important figure to emerge in the period, though a harpsichordist rather than a pianist, was Wanda Landowska (1879–1959). She demonstrated how the keyboard works of Baroque composers such as Bach, Handel, Scarlatti, and Couperin probably sounded in their own times. It would be a mistake to consider Landowska a classicist, however. She had been born in an age of Romantic playing dominated by Liszt, Leschetizky,and their pupils. Thus she grew up with and was influenced by certain Romantic traditions of performance, whatever the stringency of her musical scholarship; Landowska knew how to hold audiences breathless, and when she gave recitals, they responded with deathlike silence and rapt attention.
Her playing was Romantic, but it was at least as close in spirit to the style of playing intended by composers of the Baroque (1600–1750) and Classical (1750–1830) eras, as have been the more exacting but less emotionally resonant interpretations of most harpsichordists since Landowska. She had a miraculous quality of touch, a seemingly autonomous left hand; no artist in her generation could clarify with such deftness the polyphonic writing of the Baroque masters. And none could make their music so spring to life.
Her achievements were the result of a lifetime of scholarship, truly remarkable physical gifts, and resilient rhythm, all combined with excellent judgment about when not to hold the printed note sacrosanct. Of course, developing such judgment demanded considerable experience and imagination. She was a genius at underlining the dramatic and emotional content of a piece, and to do so, she took liberties, all kinds of liberties, while nevertheless preserving the integrity of a composer’s score. In short, her entire musical approach was Romantic: intensely personal, full of light and shade, never pedantic.
Thanks to Landowska, Bach’s music (originally composed for the harpsichord) now sounded inappropriately thick when played on the piano. One by one, pianists stopped playing Bach’s music as adapted for the piano by Liszt or by Tausig. Then they gradually stopped performing any kind of Baroque music on the piano, even Scarlatti’s. The piano repertoire, it began to be felt, was extensive enough without reverting to transcriptions of Baroque music originally written for the harpsichord—and piano performances of Bach and Scarlatti were, despite the obvious similarities between the harpsichord and the piano, transcriptions, no matter how faithfully the original notes were played. In accordance with this kind of purism came an emphasis on studying composers’ manuscript notations, a relatively new field of musicology that is flourishing even today.

What causes a helix in nature to appear with either a dextral (right-handed, or clockwise) twist or a sinistral (left-handed, or counterclockwise) twist is one of the most intriguing puzzles in the science of form. Most spiral-shaped snail species are predominantly dextral. But at one time, handedness (twist direction of the shell) was equally distributed within some snail species that have become predominantly dextral or, in a few species, predominantly sinistral. What mechanisms control handedness and keep left-handedness rare?
It would seem unlikely that evolution should discriminate against sinistral snails if sinistral and dextral snails are exact mirror images, for any disadvantage that a sinistral twist in itself could confer on its possessor is almost inconceivable. But left- and right-handed snails are not actually true mirror images of one another. Their shapes are noticeably different. Sinistral rarity might, then, be a consequence of possible disadvantages conferred by these other concomitant structural features. In addition, perhaps left- and right-handed snails cannot mate with each other, having incompatible twist directions. Presumably an individual of the rarer form would have relative difficulty in finding a mate of the same hand, thus keeping the rare form rare or creating geographically separated right- and left-handed populations.
But this evolutionary mechanism combining dissymmetry, anatomy, and chance does not provide an adequate explanation of why right-handedness should have become predominant. It does not explain, for example, why the infrequent unions between snails of opposing hands produce fewer offspring of the rarer than the commoner form in species where each parent contributes equally to handedness. Nor does it explain why, in a species where one parent determines handedness, a brood is not exclusively right- or left-handed when the offspring would have the same genetic predisposition. In the European pond snail Lymnaea peregra, a predominantly dextral species whose handedness is maternally determined, a brood might be expected to be exclusively right- or left-handed—and this often occurs. However, some broods possess a few snails of the opposing hand, and in predominantly sinistral broods, the incidence of dextrality is surprisingly high.
Here, the evolutionary theory must defer to a theory based on an explicit developmental mechanism that can favor either right- or left-handedness. In the case of Lymnaea peregra, studies indicate that a dextral gene is expressed during egg formation; i.e., before egg fertilization, the gene produces a protein, found in the cytoplasm of the egg, that controls the pattern of cell division and thus handedness. In experiments, an injection of cytoplasm from dextral eggs changes the pattern of sinistral eggs, but an injection from sinistral eggs does not influence dextral eggs. One explanation for the differing effects is that all Lymnaea peregra eggs begin left-handed but most switch to being right-handed. Thus the path to a solution to the puzzle of handedness in all snails appears to be as twisted as the helix itself.

http://gre.kmf.com/question/12b3bj.html

Frederick Douglass was unquestionably the most famous African American of the nineteenth century; indeed, when he died in 1895 he was among the most distinguished public figures in the United States. In his study of Douglass’ career as a major figure in the movement to abolish slavery and as a spokesman for Black rights, Waldo Martin has provoked controversy by contending that Douglass also deserves a prominent place in the intellectual history of the United States because he exemplified so many strands of nineteenth-century thought: romanticism, idealism, individualism, liberal humanism, and an unshakable belief in progress. But this very argument provides ammunition for those who claim that most of Douglass’ ideas, being so representative of their time, are now obsolete. Douglass’ vision of the future as a melting pot in which all racial and ethnic differences would dissolve into “a composite American nationality” appears from the pluralist perspective of many present-day intellectuals to be not only utopian but even wrongheaded. Yet there is a central aspect of Douglass’ thought that seems not in the least bit dated or irrelevant to current concerns. He has no rival in the history of the nineteenth-century United States as an insistent and effective critic of the doctrine of innate racial inequality. He not only attacked racist ideas in his speeches and writings, but he offered his entire career and all his achievements as living proof that racists were wrong in their belief that one race could be inherently superior to another.
While Martin stresses Douglass’ antiracist egalitarianism, he does not adequately explain how this aspect of Douglass’ thought fits in with his espousal of the liberal Vic-torian attitudes that many present-day intellectuals consider to be naive and outdated. The fact is that Douglass was attracted to these democratic-capitalist ideals of his time because they could be used to attack slavery and the doctrine of White supremacy. His favorite rhetorical strategy was to expose the hypocrisy of those who, while professing adherence to the ideals of democracy and equality of opportunity, condoned slavery and racial discrimination. It would have been strange indeed if he had not embraced liberal idealism, because it proved its worth for the cause of racial equality during the national crisis that eventually resulted in emancipation and citizenship for African Americans. These points may seem obvious, but had Martin given them more atten-tion, his analysis might have constituted a more convincing rebuttal to those critics who dismiss Douglass’ ideology as a relic of the past. If one accepts the proposition that Douglass’ deepest commitment was to Black equality and that he used the liberal ideals of his time as weapons in the fight for that cause, then it is hard to fault him for seizing the best weapons at hand.
第1题第2题第3题第4题
Each of the following is mentioned in the passage as an element of Douglass’ ideology EXCEPT
Aidealism
Begalitarianism
Ccapitalism
Dpluralism
Ehumanism
显示答案

At the northeast end of Isle Royale, the chorus frog, P. triseriata, breeds nearly exclusively in pools on the exposed rocky shores of Lake Superior. The persistence of these breeding pools increases with size and distance from the lake. Small pools and those next to the lake last less than the 55—83 d required for metamorphosis, and survivorship to metamorphosis in these pools is low. Large pools near the forest edge are permanent, but contain the predators Anax junius and Ambystoma laterale. Anax junius eliminates P. triseriata if they occur together in the same pool. P. triseriata sustains high densities only in pools at intermediate levels on the shore, where intraspecific competition is suggested by effects of density on initial growth rate and on the length of the larval period. A field experiment using randomized blocks in a factorial design showed significant effects of both food and density on survivorship and growth; in the experiment, tadpoles removed all supplemental food. The results demonstrate density dependence and indicate that food is limiting and in short supply in the natural breeding pools. Two features of P. triseriata population control may be common to other anurans of ephemeral habitats. First, partitioning of the larval habitat may allow predators to eliminate tadpoles from many pools, yet create refuges from predation in others. Second, in pools of predation, competition may be intense and exert control on recruitment.