十月金秋第十次作业

glxingUID：2156425

Should a city try to preserve its old, historic buildings or destroy them and replace them with modern buildings? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion

With the development of the society, the administrations of cities are confused by the dilemma that whether to preserve its old, historic buildings or replace with mordern buildings. In my opinion, the government should put the preservation of old buildings as the first seat when making a decision.

First of all, the old,historic buildings are of great importantce in culture since they are connected with the past and the history. For example, the Forbidden city in Beijing, China, has a history of more than five hundred years. Its design in architecture has the typical royal style, which attracts milllions of tourists from domestic and abroad everyyear. In fact, many old buildings deserve uch kinds of preservation like the Forbidden City. If we destroy them blindly, we would lose invaluable wealth in traditional heritage. It is also a great pity for our descendants.

Secondly, some old buildings serve as the city's self-identity because they could bring a city special characters that make the city differ from others. Take the city  of London as an example, the Big Ben gives the busy city some relaxing feeling as well as some historical imprint. Someone worry that the old buildings could make the city look like out of date, but I think this worry does not exist actually. Those historic buildings have merged into the whold city and become an indispensable component. Imagine that all of the historic buildings in Rome have been replaced by the mordern skyscrapers. Can we say that kind of city would be more beautiful than the original one?

Maybe someone would argue that the mordern buildings could meet more demands of society such as living space for the citizens, working spaces for companies. From their point of view, thos old buildings are just waste of space resources. But I think if our resolution to this problem is only to destroy the old buildings, then we would face the same problems when the spaces are used up. Because more and more people would like to immigrate to the city. So this way is just a temporary one. Other methods can be thinked  out and tried, for example,  some satelite towns around the cities could be build in order to balance the two  conflicts.

In conclusion, the mordern buildings could be built at any time if we need, but the old,historic ones would never be rebuilt if they have been destroyed. So we should try our best to preserve them rather than detroy.

ensueUID：2196590

Should a city try to preserve its old, historic buildings or destroy them and replace them with modern buildings? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion With the development of the society, the administrations of cities are confused by the dilemma that whether to preserve its old, historic buildings or replace with mordern buildings. In my opinion, the government should put the preservation of old buildings as（at?） the first seat when making a decision. （末句的old一次用的不理想，没能表达出你的意思，historic可能更好些） First of all, the old,historic buildings are of great importantce in culture since they are connected with the past and the history（这两个其实是近义，可以只留一个）. For example, the Forbidden city in Beijing, China, has a history of more than five hundred years. Its design in architecture has the typical royal style, which attracts milllions of tourists from domestic and abroad everyyear. In fact, many old buildings deserve such kinds of preservation like the Forbidden City. If we destroy them blindly, we would lose invaluable wealth in traditional heritage. It is also a great pity for our descendants. （看到这里，我还是在考虑“old”一词，可以换成更好的，比如说bear/convey + the value of + cultur/history/civilization） Secondly, some old buildings serve as the city's self-identity (这个观点很新颖)because they could bring a city special characters that make the city differ from others. Take the city  of London as an example, the Big Ben gives the busy city some relaxing feeling as well as some historical imprint. Someone worry that the old buildings could make the city look like out of date, but I think this worry does not exist actually. Those historic buildings have merged into the whold city and become an indispensable component. Imagine that all of the historic buildings in Rome have been replaced by the mordern skyscrapers. Can we say that kind of city would be more beautiful than the original one? （Big Bang不算典型的bldg吧？） Maybe someone would argue that the mordern buildings could meet more demands of society such as living space for the citizens, working spaces for companies. From their point of view, those old buildings are just waste of space resources. But I think if our resolution to this problem is only to destroy the old buildings, then we would face the same problems when the spaces are used up. Because more and more people would like to immigrate to the city. So this way is just a temporary one. Other methods can be thinked  out and tried, for example,  some satelite towns around the cities could be build in order to balance the two  conflicts. 语法错误 In conclusion, the mordern buildings could be built at any time if we need, but the old,historic ones would never be rebuilt if they have been destroyed. So we should try our best to preserve them rather than detroy. 观点鲜明，论证合理。

[ 本帖最后由 ensue 于 2007-8-25 11:31 编辑 ]