Issue48 by 海王泪

海王泪UID: 2673613

TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "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."

In the past, individuals have long been emphasized in biography, memoir, reportage and other documents because famous few are easily recorded and impressive. Therefore, the study of history limited by such materials naturally places more emphasis on certain people. It is true that too much focus on individuals could lead to a half-baked perspective of significant events and trends, but that is the best choice until we have access to enough information about those forgotten crowd.

First of all, we should understand that history is made possible both by famous few and forgotten mass. Once I heard a lecture from the head of History at my university, enlightening that “Famous individuals acted as catalyst while anonymous majorities served as basic reactant.” This analogy have illuminated me that individuals indispensably offer various choices for change while groups of people together make a decision if the most significant events and trends would occur.

It seems that they are equally important if we want to see the whole picture of important historical cases. However, in practice of history study, no matter students and professors would give priority to famous few because they are seemingly representative and easily accessed.

To some extent, famous people serve as agents for their advocates and therefore sometimes we can understand significant events and trends without placing much emphasis on multitudes. Those famous few directly or indirectly organize people with similar purpose, wish, and belief. Simultaneously they sign identity for specific groups of people and together bring significant development. In science, Vinton G. Clef created technique TCP/IP and most people have chosen it, being netizen. In art, Pete brought Poppin style which has been adopted by more and more dancers as a milestone of street dancing becoming a high-class one. In politics, Lincoln, Mandela and Martin Luther King have driven society to racial equality while Adolf Hitler committed genocide with following sheep. Due to strong motivation and vivid characters, these famous men paint a portrait for their groups and for us. We can understand the collective wish for more and faster information; can understand the same aspiration to dance gentlemanly; understand the shared belief in freedom and equality, or animosity and discrimination, though we only see certain individuals. Famous few are guides for groups of people to a clear identity; famous few are also guides for us to understand the history.

Moreover, most of the historical materials are patent of celebrities which give them priority to contact with us first. Many examples like Newton and Einstein, Van Gogh and da Vinci, Hitler and Churchill are stunning images for us in historical events. Meanwhile, other contemporarily contributing scientists, artists, politicians and advocates living behind such bright figures would be forgotten. Seldom predecessors are willing to write down noteless people, and little record could be inherited without people’s interests. Hence if we attempt to inquire the long journey of history, great men and women are often the prior and brilliant logo in each station.

Nevertheless, we should be wary of absolutely placing attention to famous. Over-emphasizing famous few may lead to failure in truly understanding significant events and trends. Not all materials about celebrities are real and well-representative. By fake or restricted materials, we may fail into illusion of history. For instance, only reading the biography or memoir about Emperor Wen of Sui, we cannot learn if welfare of people really improved after his reformation of production. The king’s living standard was unique. What he met in folk, or heard from bureaucracy, could be artificially designed for inspection. Even worse, himself could distort historical facts by revising books.

Coming across similar doubts, information from forgotten mass, if available, could offer important perspectives and proof. Since groups of people are also creators of history, their cultural relics can also generate a great sound to understand significant events and trends. We can examine if the reformation worked as what Emperor Wen of Sui expected and recorded as long as we attain enough materials such as letters, diary and even subsisted tools or their dead bodies from forgotten people. We should keep in mind that the reformation was made both possible by famous few and forgotten mass. What’s more, understanding anonymous majorities for learning why famous few directly or indirectly fake history can help to explain the ideology in their period.

All in all, in the past, our study of history pays more attention on individuals. If we have access to groups of people, we are willing to learn and research them for proof and complement. In the future, with more advanced record tools and better statistic information, the study of history may gradually call for a balance between famous few and forgotten mass. Future students or professors perhaps are not only interested in Vinton G. Clef who brings us Internet, but also give attention to the change of average online time from 1990 to 2010 in order to witness the significant development of information age.

plukaUID: 2721764

In the past（只在过去如此吗？一直如此吧）, individuals have long been emphasized in biography, memoir, reportage and other documents because （+the）famous few are easily recorded and impressive. Therefore, the study of history limited by such materials naturally places more emphasis on certain people. It is true that too much focus on individuals could lead to a half-baked（学习一下） perspective of significant events and trends, but that is the best choice until we have access to enough information about those forgotten crowd.（直接回应题目，很好）

First of all, we should understand that history is made possible both by famous few and forgotten mass. Once I heard a lecture from the head of History at my university, enlightening that “Famous individuals acted as catalyst while anonymous majorities served as basic reactant.” This analogy have illuminated me（illuminated似乎不能接人吧） that individuals indispensably offer various choices for change（“催化物”跟“提供多选择”没有必然联系，比喻发展失当） while groups of people together make a decision if（正式文体用whether而非if）the most significant events and trends would occur.用名人名言论证，比喻很不错。但后续的发展和总结略显单薄。

It seems that they are equally important if we want to see the whole picture of important historical cases. However, in practice of history study, no matter （改成both）students and professors would give priority to （+the）famous few because they are seemingly（这个seemingly有些“其实并非如此”的意思，那么你到底是说他有代表性还是没有呢？） representative and easily accessed. 

To some extent, famous people serve as agents for their advocates and therefore sometimes we can understand significant events and trends without placing much emphasis on multitudes. Those famous few directly or indirectly organize people with similar purpose, wish, and belief. Simultaneously they sign identity for specific groups of people and together bring significant development. In science, Vinton G. Clef created technique TCP/IP and most people have chosen it, being netizen. In art, Pete brought Poppin style which has been adopted by more and more dancers as a milestone of street dancing becoming a high-class one. In politics, Lincoln, Mandela and Martin Luther King have driven society to racial equality while Adolf Hitler committed genocide with following sheep. （几个例子列出了各领域的代表人物和他们的功绩，但大人物是如何反应公众特点的这一主题还不突出。大人物跟群体之间的联系有待加强）Due to strong motivation and vivid characters, these famous men paint a portrait for their groups and for us. We can understand the collective wish for more and faster information; can understand the same aspiration to dance gentlemanly; understand the shared belief in freedom and equality, or animosity and discrimination, though we only see certain individuals.（这段排比不错，但结构上问题很大，所谓并列就是结构要对应！不要一会有can一会没有的。而且既然都用上了分号，为啥不给各个部分添上主语构成分句并列，而非目前的成分并列呢） Famous few are guides for groups of people to a clear identity（这个same identity的意味论述得还不是特别清楚）; famous few are also guides for us to understand the history.

Moreover, most of the historical materials are patent（s) of celebrities which give them priority to contact with（去掉，contract及物） us first. Many examples like Newton and Einstein, Van Gogh and da Vinci, Hitler and Churchill are stunning images for us in historical events. Meanwhile, other contemporarily contributing scientists, artists, politicians and advocates living behind such bright figures would be forgotten. Seldom predecessors are willing to write down noteless people, and little record could be inherited without people’s interests. Hence if we attempt to inquire the long journey of history, great men and women are often the prior and brilliant logo in each station.（本段描述的是现象和事实，如果要更深入，可以探讨一下背后的原因）

Nevertheless, we should be wary of absolutely placing attention to famous. Over-emphasizing（能用名词就别用ING形式） famous few may lead to failure in truly understanding significant events and trends. Not all materials about celebrities are real and well-representative. By fake or restricted materials, we may fail into illusion of history. For instance, only reading the biography or memoir about Emperor Wen of Sui, we cannot learn if welfare of people really improved after his reformation of production. The king’s living standard was unique.（这与观点何干？） What he met in folk, or heard from bureaucracy, could be artificially designed for inspection. （强调的应该是我们受蒙蔽，不是皇帝受蒙蔽）Even worse, himself could distort historical facts by revising books.

Coming across similar doubts, information from forgotten mass, if available, could offer important perspectives and proof. Since groups of people are also creators of history, their cultural relics can also generate a great sound to understand significant events and trends. We can examine if the reformation worked as what Emperor Wen of Sui expected and recorded as long as we attain enough materials such as letters, diary and even subsisted tools or their dead bodies from forgotten people. We should keep in mind that the reformation was made both possible by famous few and forgotten mass. What’s more, understanding anonymous majorities for learning why famous few directly or indirectly fake history can help to explain the ideology in their period.（后面这两句与段落主题句离得有点远了。明明讨论的是大众的影响，怎么扯到二者共同创造历史、理解大人物造假动机上来了？）

All in all, in the past, our study of history pays more attention on individuals. If we have access to groups of people, we are willing to（这个willing to主观了一点，其实没准人家就是不爱研究呢） learn and research them for proof and complement. In the future, with more advanced record tools and better statistic information,（将来一定能有吗？有了一定能起作用吗？这个构想对我来说不够convincing） the study of history may gradually call for a balance between famous few and forgotten mass. Future students or professors perhaps are not only interested in Vinton G. Clef who brings us Internet, but also give attention to the change of average online time from 1990 to 2010 in order to witness the significant development of information age.（这个，对比一下末段与首段，可以看到思路其实已经偏了——首先讨论的是历史研究的偏重，到最后却扯到将来如何如何。还是拉回来吧）

以上~

plukaUID: 2721764

另外，八百多的字数实在是多了点吧……点不需要这么多，选几个说透就好。