题目：
The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.
正文：
Does study of history nowadays place too much emphasis on individuals? And the groups of people behind them have been forgotten? In my opinion, I think focusing on a certain leader is just one of the study methods of history. And we are still clear about that, history is made equally by both its individual and the mass, which together, should not be forgotten.
A piece of history, a beautiful song flouts in human civilization, was played by the contemporary orchestra. The one under the focus of audiences, of course, will be the director in the middle of stage. It is he, who, led his men to begin a revolution; raised the morale of his people to fight against the invaders; or, thought out a favorable policy that ceasing a large depression. After all, in every episode of history, there is always a leader or a hero for us to remember. And it seems quite reasonable. First, it is hard for the history materials to record every member that made an effort in that period. Secondly, people nowadays is likely to just remember one symbol figure to represent this historical event, no matter how many others were involved. Consequently, the study of history will naturally pay more attention to these fortune individuals.
However, to emphasis individuals, the leaders, does not mean to ignore the contributions made by the mass behind them. As we know, pointed out by Micheal Korda, a lead is like a mirror, reflecting the views and purpose of his people, and putting their dreams and hopes into words. The strength of his mass made him strong; their courage made him a hero; their determination made him determined; their intelligence made him wise---a leader was just the sum of his men. So when we talk about a hero in that particular scene, we are actually indicating the group of people represented by him, and their effort in it is still recognized.
Further more, like a song played by the whole orchestra, the historical event cannot exist without either its leader or its mass. Image what will happen if Roosevelt did not seize power during the despairing depression at the end of the 1940s? Would US follow German and step into the Fascism? Would justice still win the devil in the Second World War? Then think about the contemporary people. What if they did not believe in Roosevelt? Or that they were not willing to go to war at any price during this war? Or that people around the world stood aside when the war began? The history may alter its pattern and the world nowadays may even up side down or destroyed. Therefore, only when both the conditions of the individuals and the mass are possessed by the time, could that particular chapter of history exist in our memory.
In summary, the attention of history on the individuals is a special way to remember the ever contributions of the contemporary leaders and their groups, which should go deep into our heart equally. After all, history is an episode, the composers of which, no matter that he just gave it a word or piece of phrase, should be recognized and known.
(532 words)
[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-7-31 at 01:16 ]作者: mamak6322 时间: 2005-8-1 01:23:49
Does study of history nowadays place too much emphasis on individuals? And the groups of people behind them have been forgotten? (这第二个问句感觉不是问句吧 改改) In my opinion, I think focusing on a certain leader is just one of the study methods of history. And（用moreover代替and） we are still (用should好些) clear about that, history is made equally by both its individual and the mass, which together, should not be forgotten.
A piece of history, a beautiful song flouts in human civilization, was played by the contemporary orchestra.（这句比喻不知老毛子能不能看懂~~） The one under the focus of audiences, of course, will be the director in the middle of stage. It is he, who, led his men to begin a revolution; raised the morale of his people to fight against the invaders; or, thought out a favorable policy that ceasing a large depression. After all, in every episode of history, there is always a leader or a hero for us to remember. And it seems quite reasonable. First, it is hard for the history materials to record every member that made an effort in that period. Secondly, people nowadays is likely to just remember one symbol figure to represent this historical event, no matter how many others were involved. Consequently, the study of history will naturally pay more attention to these fortune （词性有误）individuals.
However, to emphasis individuals, the leaders, does not mean to ignore the contributions made by the mass behind them. As we know, pointed out by Micheal Korda, a lead is like a mirror, reflecting the views and purpose of his people, and putting their dreams and hopes into words. The strength of his mass made him strong; their courage made him a hero; their determination made him determined; their intelligence made him wise---a leader was just the sum of his men. （这段排比挺不错！！增添文彩~）So when we talk about a hero in that particular scene, we are actually indicating the group of people represented by him, and their effort in it is still recognized.
Further more, like a song played by the whole orchestra, the historical event cannot exist without either its leader or its mass. Image what will happen if Roosevelt did not seize power during the despairing depression at the end of the 1940s? Would US follow German and step into the Fascism? Would justice still win the devil in the Second World War? Then think about the contemporary people. What if they did not believe in Roosevelt? Or that they were not willing to go to war at any price during this war?（句式上不构成问句阿！） Or that people around the world stood aside when the war began? The history may alter its pattern and the world nowadays may （中间缺少动词,加个become）even up side down or destroyed. Therefore, only when both the conditions of the individuals and the mass are possessed by the time, could that particular chapter of history exist in our memory.
In summary, the attention of history on the individuals is a special way to remember the ever contributions of the contemporary leaders and their groups, which should go deep into our heart equally. After all, history is an episode, the composers of which, no matter that he just gave it a word or piece of phrase, should be recognized and known.
Does study of history nowadays place too much emphasis on individuals? And the groups of people behind them have been forgotten? (这第二个问句感觉不是问句吧 改改) In my opinion, I think focusing on a certain leader is just one of the study methods of history. And（用moreover代替and） we are still (用should好些) clear about that, history is made equally by both its individual and the mass, which together, should not be forgotten.
A piece of history, a beautiful song flouts in human civilization, was played by the contemporary orchestra.（这句比喻不知老毛子能不能看懂~~） The one under the focus of audiences, of course, will be the director in the middle of stage. It is he, who, led his men to begin a revolution; raised the morale of his people to fight against the invaders; or, thought out a favorable policy that ceasing a large depression. After all, in every episode of history, there is always a leader or a hero for us to remember. And it seems quite reasonable. First, it is hard for the history materials to record every member that made an effort in that period. Secondly, people nowadays is likely to just remember one symbol figure to represent this historical event, no matter how many others were involved. Consequently, the study of history will naturally pay more attention to these fortune （词性有误）individuals.
However, to emphasis individuals, the leaders, does not mean to ignore the contributions made by the mass behind them. As we know, pointed out by Micheal Korda, a lead is like a mirror, reflecting the views and purpose of his people, and putting their dreams and hopes into words. The strength of his mass made him strong; their courage made him a hero; their determination made him determined; their intelligence made him wise---a leader was just the sum of his men. （这段排比挺不错！！增添文彩~）So when we talk about a hero in that particular scene, we are actually indicating the group of people represented by him, and their effort in it is still recognized.
Further more, like a song played by the whole orchestra, the historical event cannot exist without either its leader or its mass. Image what will happen if Roosevelt did not seize power during the despairing depression at the end of the 1940s? Would US follow German and step into the Fascism? Would justice still win the devil in the Second World War? Then think about the contemporary people. What if they did not believe in Roosevelt? Or that they were not willing to go to war at any price during this war?（句式上不构成问句阿！） Or that people around the world stood aside when the war began? The history may alter its pattern and the world nowadays may （中间缺少动词,加个become）even up side down or destroyed. Therefore, only when both the conditions of the individuals and the mass are possessed by the time, could that particular chapter of history exist in our memory.
In summary, the attention of history on the individuals is a special way to remember the ever contributions of the contemporary leaders and their groups, which should go deep into our heart equally. After all, history is an episode, the composers of which, no matter that he just gave it a word or piece of phrase, should be recognized and known.