1010G【fish】issue48

azure9UID: 2789030

48"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."


请于5月26日晚23点前提交作业。并把作业word文档发给互改的组员
1--->2指，1帮2改，2的作文给1改

第一次互改顺序：
1--->10
2--->11
3--->1
5--->2
7--->3
9--->7
10--->5
11--->9

第一次自改文上交的时间是：5月27日晚23点

第二次互改的顺序：
1--->3
2--->5
3--->7
5--->10
7--->9
9--->11
10--->1
11--->2




第二次自改文的上交时间是：5月29日晚23点

azure9UID: 2789030

The author asserts that the historical study devote into famous few rather than groups of people, which is not appropriate. I can't deny that the groups of people were necessary in order to make things happened. But, famous few who function as a key role in a historical event or trend are much more representativeness and valuable for study. They are the creators of the history.

The famous few got power to take charge of the group of people. Their diesel was accomplished by the group of people. Their words weighted a lot. What they left for the world are valuable for history study and their influence remain until today. Alexander the Great, the most celebrated member of the Argead Dynasty, created one of the largest empires in ancient history. He was known to be undefeated in battle and is considered one of the most successful commanders of all time. He is one of the most famous figures of antiquity, and is remembered for his tactical ability, his conquests, and for spreading Greek culture into the East. His accomplishments and legacy have been preserved and depicted in many ways. While the soldier who help him to get all this were function as a group of assistants and can not be told the name by people today.

The famous few who got extraordinary insight and wonderful talent can enlighten the group of people. They were usually the core role in some historical trend. During the Renaissance, there came out numbers of famous few, Raphael, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and also Masaccio, Brunelleschi est. What they achieved at that time profoundly affect human intellecture life not only in early period of time, but today as well. It's their great minds that push the civilization to go forward. They are the source of Humanism; Study in them can help us understand the origin of the human culture. And the group of people in the world of all ages also be influenced by their intellective power.

The famous few who were earnest about reforming had chosen a different way from the group of people that they create a new branch of human civilization. Martin Luther, a German priest and professor of theology, initiated the Protestant Reformation which established Protestantism as a constituent branch of contemporary Christianity. When Martin Luther published The Ninety-Five Theses in 1517, and concluded in 1648 with the Treaty of Westphalia that ended one hundred and thirty-one years of consecutive European religious wars. What he had done had impacted the world's religion pattern. Though the group of people had involved in the event in some ways, they can't be written in history books, for they choosing a way that others had already gone through.

In conclusion, it was the famous few that reflect the whole historical delineation. They were the heroes of a certain event and trend. Studying in them can help us grab the essential part of the history. They are the few who represent the whole.

=====================
二改：
The author asserts that the historical study devote into famous few rather than groups of people, which is not appropriate. I can't deny that the groups of people were necessary in order to make things happened. But, famous few who function as a key role in a historical event or trend are much more representativeness and valuable for study. They are the creators of the history. So they really deserved to be emphasis in history today.

The famous few got power to take charge of the group of people. Though their diesel was accomplished by the group of people, their words still weighted a lot. What they left for the world is valuable for history study and their influence remains until today. Alexander the Great, the most celebrated member of the Argead Dynasty, created one of the largest empires in ancient history. He was known to be undefeated in battle and is considered one of the most successful commanders of all time. He is one of the most famous figures of antiquity, and is remembered for his tactical ability, his conquests, and for spreading Greek culture into the East. His accomplishments and legacy have been preserved and depicted in many ways. While the soldiers who help him to get all this were function as a group of assistants and can not be told the name by people today. He was the one make decision and show ambitious.

The famous few who got extraordinary insight and wonderful talent can enlighten the group of people. They were usually the core role in some historical trend. During the Renaissance, there came out numbers of famous few, Raphael, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and also Masaccio, Brunelleschi est. What they achieved at that time profoundly affect human intellecture life not only in early period of time, but today as well. It's their great minds that push the civilization to go forward. They are the source of Humanism; Study in them can help us understand the origin of the human culture. And the group of people in the world of all ages also is influenced by their intellective power.

The famous few who were earnest about reforming had chosen a different way from the group of people that they create a new branch of human civilization. Martin Luther, a German priest and professor of theology, initiated the Protestant Reformation which established Protestantism as a constituent branch of contemporary Christianity. When Martin Luther published The Ninety-Five Theses in 1517, and concluded in 1648 with the Treaty of Westphalia that ended one hundred and thirty-one years of consecutive European religious wars. What he had done had impacted the world's religion pattern. Though the group of people had involved in the event in some ways, they wouldn’t be written in history books, for they choosing a way that others had already gone through.

In conclusion, it was the famous few that reflect the whole historical delineation. They were the heroes of a certain event and trend. Studying in them can help us grab the essential part of the history. They are the few who represent the whole.

azure9UID: 2789030

改agnes:

The speaker claims that the most significant historical events and trends were made possible by groups of people instead of the famous few, and that the study of history emphasize too much on the latter. Yet, I tend to disagree with the dual claim as a careful consideration into the claim as discussed below will show how ex parte the two aspects of this claim.

Historians always trace the clue of the history by studying a few people who were well-known during that period, with less concern about the study of the common people. From my perspective, they do so for the sake of efficiency and quality of historical research. When studying a blank history, historians need to search for an entrance into it, which finally falls on the famous few. By following up their life, historians will quickly get far more branch knowledge than by tracing the life of those common people who can hardly provide myriad materials. Therefore, it is not a prejudice but a necessity for historians to lay more attention on the study of the famous few.
[我觉得这一段是问题在于说的角度都是在study of history上，就是一直在說研究著名的那幾個人會為歷史研究帶來怎么樣的方便，但是卻沒有說為什麽研究這些著名的人可以讓歷史研究變得有效而有質量呢？是因為他們做了什麽？如果具體的說一下的話，就不會顯得太空，而且比較有說服力]

Admittedly, the history is made by group efforts not by the power of several individuals. However, when it comes to the most significant events or trends, what we recall mostly are the decision-makers in the events. For instance, assuming the Presidency at the depth of the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt helped the American people regain faith in themselves. His major decision-New Deal Program brought hope to the whole depressed nation, thus crowning him one of the greatest presidents in the history of the United States(學習了). Though the powerful efforts made by his citizens can not be overlooked, their role as executants can not equal that of Roosevelt(這裡有點不明白怎么用that,請教一下是什麽用法？).
[這段說famous few make decsion in significant events. 用了Franklin在Great Depression期間的例子支撐觀點，條理很清楚。]

What’s more, just because the famous few are more likely to receive attention from historians, it does not mean the power of the entire group working behind the stage is not recognized. Since it is difficult to conclude all their performance and what they do are nearly all the same, researches always use a conception of “group efforts” to cover what they contribute to the events without naming them one after another. However, their contribution will not be turned a blind eye to. When reminded of the construction of the Great Wall, we will highly appreciate and admire the fruit of the workers’ hardworking instead of thinking of the decision made by Qin Shi Huang as the workers devoted too much for the construction and their contribution can not be weighed.
[這段學習了很多地道的用法，agnes的語言功底很棒呢！這段說其實我們也在關注group of people，用了長城的例子來支撐。題外話：我想到金字塔的例子也可以用]


In sum, history is shaped by both key individuals and those nameless groups. It is the famous few that provide visions of the future and made the major decisions. Their efforts are the highlight of the history. However, the faceless groups are also a part of history, whose contribution, though with no wonder, is still born in mind by people nowadays.

總的來說文章寫得很棒，語言地道又流暢。有個小問題就是說，文章的觀點提得有一點不清晰，我覺得可能是因為在首段沒有很直接的把觀點挑明，而之後的每一段開頭都只是一個小讓步，真正的觀點到了後面一點才提出來。而整篇文章的觀點也有一點不夠集中，先說1、歷史學家研究famous few是為了高效高質量的進行歷史研究。2、很多重大的歷史事件都是由famous few決定的。3、其實我們也沒有忘記group of people的貢獻。最後不知道你想說什麽。是說famous few和grouop of people同樣重要嗎？我覺得如果在每一段的段尾和主要觀點聯繫一下，思路會顯得比較明確。這邊說得有點不清楚，不然你看到到QQ上我們討論一下好了。

agnes2010UID: 2794922

The speaker claims that the most significant historical events and trends were made possible by groups of people instead of the famous few, and that the study of history emphasize too much on the latter. Yet, I tend to disagree with the dual claim as a careful consideration into the claim as discussed below will show how ex parte the two aspects of this claim.

Historians always trace the clue of the history by studying a few people who were well-known during that period, with less concern about the study of the common people. From my perspective, they do so for the sake of efficiency and quality of historical research. When studying a blank history, historians need to search for an entrance into it, which finally falls on the famous few. By following up their life, historians will quickly get far more branch knowledge than by tracing the life of those common people who can hardly provide myriad materials. Therefore, it is not a prejudice but a necessity for historians to lay more attention on the study of the famous few.

Admittedly, the history is made by group efforts not by the power of several individuals. However, when it comes to the most significant events or trends, what we recall mostly are the decision-makers in the events. For instance, assuming the Presidency at the depth of the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt helped the American people regain faith in themselves. His major decision-New Deal Program brought hope to the whole depressed nation, thus crowning him one of the greatest presidents in the history of the United States. Though the powerful efforts made by his citizens can not be overlooked, their role as executants can not equal that of Roosevelt.

What’s more, just because the famous few are more likely to receive attention from historians, it does not mean the power of the entire group working behind the stage is not recognized. Since it is difficult to conclude all their performance and what they do are nearly all the same, researches always use a conception of “group efforts” to cover what they contribute to the events without naming them one after another. However, their contribution will not be turned a blind eye to. When reminded of the construction of the Great Wall, we will highly appreciate and admire the fruit of the workers’ hardworking instead of thinking of the decision made by Qin Shi Huang as the workers devoted too much for the construction and their contribution can not be weighed.

In sum, history is shaped by both key individuals and those nameless groups. It is the famous few that provide visions of the future and made the major decisions. Their efforts are the highlight of the history. However, the faceless groups are also a part of history, whose contribution, though with no wonder, is still born in mind by people nowadays.


===================================================

自改一：
小C帮我改的很有道理呢~发现自己的论点不明晰，而且支持地论证也混乱极了~
试着改了一下~希望能有进步！

The speaker claims that the most significant historical events and trends were made possible by groups of people instead of the famous few, and that the study of history emphasize too much on the latter. Yet, I tend to disagree with the dual claim as in spite of the fact that group efforts should be emphasized, the importance of the famous few is still second to none.

First of all, compared with common people, the famous few deserve far more research value. Historians always trace the clue of the history by studying a few people who were well-known during that period, with less concern about the study of the common people. From my perspective, they do so for the sake of efficiency and quality of historical research. The famous few always take part in the event more initiatively and experience the history more vividly, thus providing the possibility of reflecting the country’s condition and the people’s livelihood. When studying a blank history, historians need to search for an entrance into it, which finally falls on the famous few. By following up their life, historians will quickly get far more branch knowledge than by tracing the life of those common people who can hardly provide myriad materials. Therefore, it is not a prejudice but a necessity for historians to lay more attention on the study of the famous few.


In addition, besides that the typical figures of those famous few benefit the study of history, their achievements are incomparable with those of others. when it comes to the most significant events or trends, what we recall mostly are the decision-makers in the events. For instance, assuming the Presidency at the depth of the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt helped the American people regain faith in themselves. His major decision-New Deal Program brought hope to the whole depressed nation, thus crowning him one of the greatest presidents in the history of the United States. Though the powerful efforts made by his citizens can not be overlooked, their role as executants can not equal that of Roosevelt. Without the brilliant and decisive decision made by Roosevelt, the American citizens may undergo the depression for a long time regardless of their together efforts.

However, just because the famous few are more likely to receive attention from historians, it does not mean the power of the entire group working behind the stage is not recognized. Since it is difficult to conclude all their performance and what they do are nearly all the same, researches always use a conception of “group efforts” to cover what they contribute to the events without naming them one after another. Instead of being forgotten, their contribution will still be kept in people’s mind. When reminded of the construction of the Great Wall, we will highly appreciate and admire the fruit of the workers’ hardworking rather than thinking of the decision made by Qin Shi Huang as the workers devoted too much for the construction and their contribution can not be weighed.

In sum, history is shaped by both key individuals and those nameless groups. It is the famous few that provide visions of the future and made the major decisions. Their efforts are the highlight of the history, which can be replaced by none. However, the faceless groups are also a part of history, whose contribution, though with no wonder, is still born in mind by people nowadays.


===================================================

自改二：
谢谢小凝的改文~~
之前经过小C的指导好像在思路上更加清晰了~观点也明确了一些~

The speaker claims that the most significant historical events and trends were made possible by groups of people instead of the famous few, and that the study of history emphasize too much on the latter. Yet, I tend to disagree with the dual claim as in spite of the fact that group efforts should be emphasized, the importance of the famous few is still second to none.

First of all, compared with common people, the famous few deserve far more research value. Historians always trace the clue of the history by studying a few people who were well-known during that period, with less concern about the study of the common people. From my perspective, they do so for the sake of efficiency and quality of historical research. The famous few always take part in the event more initiatively and experience the history more vividly, thus providing the possibility of reflecting the country’s condition and the people’s livelihood. When studying a blank history, historians need to search for an entrance into it, which finally falls on the famous few. By following up their life, historians will quickly get far more branch knowledge than by tracing the life of those common people who can hardly provide myriad materials. Therefore, it is not a prejudice but a necessity for historians to lay more attention on the study of the famous few.

In addition, besides that the typical figures of those famous few benefit the study of history, their achievements are incomparable with those of others. when it comes to the most significant events or trends, what we recall mostly are the decision-makers in the events. For instance, assuming the Presidency at the depth of the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt helped the American people regain faith in themselves. His major decision-New Deal Program brought hope to the whole depressed nation, thus crowning him one of the greatest presidents in the history of the United States. Though the powerful efforts made by his citizens can not be overlooked, their role as executants can not equal that of Roosevelt. Without the brilliant and decisive decision made by Roosevelt, the American citizens may undergo the depression for a long time regardless of their together efforts.

However, just because the famous few are more likely to receive attention from historians, it does not mean the power of the entire group working behind the stage is not recognized. Since it is difficult to conclude all their performance and what they do are nearly all the same, researches always use a conception of “group efforts” to cover what they contribute to the events without naming them one after another. Instead of being forgotten, their contribution will still be kept in people’s mind. When reminded of the construction of the Great Wall, we will highly appreciate and admire the fruit of the workers’ hardworking rather than thinking of the decision made by Qin Shi Huang as the workers devoted too much for the construction and their contribution can not be weighed.

In sum, history is shaped by both key individuals and those nameless groups. It is the famous few that provide visions of the future and make the major decisions. Their efforts are the highlight of the history, which can be replaced by none. However, the faceless groups are also a part of history, whose contribution, though with no wonder, is still born in mind by people nowadays.

agnes2010UID: 2794922

改小凝 O(∩_∩)O哈哈~

When you open the history books, different familiar names will greet the eyes, Napoléon Bonaparte, the one rose to prominence under the First French Republic and led successful campaigns against the First and Second Coalitions arrayed against France, Bernard Law Montgomery, who successfully commanded Allied forces at the Battle of EI Alamein, a major turning point in the Western Desert Campaign during World War II, Henry Ford, the American founder of the Ford Motor Company and father of modern assembly lines used in mass production, etc. 【这一段列举太值得学习了！连贯流畅而且好多说法都值得学习~】However, we can hardly find any description about people’s effort. Indeed, without those famous leaders, the world may be still in a state of disunity; without those icons from different fields, the world may still get stuck in the rut. However, without the support from the groups of people, those well-known guys would not have such an influence on the fields they belong to.
the famous few 和社会群体同样重要

Those stars that are still shining in people’s memory, is【语法有点问题】 an indispensable part as the wheel of history rolls on. Their excellent leadership, deep faith and remarkable intelligence, strengthen national cohesion and social integration. 【继续学习！】Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the spiritual leader of Indian, devoted his life to employing non-cooperation, non-violence and peaceful resistance as his “weapons” in the struggle again British. At the call of Gandhi, hundreds of millions of people who were divided by caste, religion, language and ethnicity, began to uniform and fight against the British rule over India. Under the leadership of Winston Churchill, the British finally beat back the attack of Nazi Germany and won the World War II. With these leaders’ charisma, people are awakened and pull【pulled】 together to fight for the dreams.
the famous few是历史发展不可或缺的一部分。甘地和丘吉尔的例子简洁明了，语言也特别好！学习中~

Marking down such feats of strength of great leaders in history books is a good way to keep it fresh in our memory. Thus, their spirits, great wisdom, steadfast determination to achieve the goals and experiences to deal with different obstacles, hand down from generation to generation, accumulating more and more cultural sediment in the way of our development. When reading their glorious deeds, we get inspiration and are encouraged to seek after our goals.
记录并阅读the famous few的事迹有助于我们的发展。

However, a play will never turn out to be successful if there is no actor but only directors.【用比喻的手法来说~学习！】 The same goes for the relationship between common people and great leaders. Suppose that there were no troops in the command of Churchill, how could he work out his plan and fight back the assault from Nazi Germany? How did Gandhi conduct the movement if he had no followers? Without the support and aid from people, their plans and strategies are just blueprints that could never come true. Instead, people, are the cement and bricks that build up their dreams.
历史的发展除了the famous few还离不开人民的帮助。这里反问的两个问题又和前面的例子相呼应了~棒！

Moreover, in history, it’s not uncommon to find that even though lack of out-standings’【这里应该是the outstandings' 吧~】guiding, people can still get together and have a great influence over the world. The Chartist Movement, led by British working class, with six million signatures presented to Parliament after a huge meeting on Kennington Common, achieved great prominence in the story of Chartism. Furthermore, the cultures of various nations, the good merits of human, the large amount of gismos, are not only the result of famous guys, but mostly the crystallization of groups of people’s wisdom. With people’s greatly importance in human’s development, we shouldn’t omit its struggle and effort, which will be like betraying history. What’s more, it does remind us that once you can get the support from your people, you are likely to be successful.
没有the famous few一样可以通过群体的力量来发展。the Chartist Movement的例子见识了！

In conclusion, the world is not made of separated persons, but the different nations. Without the effort and support from nations, the history is just pieces that cannot be glued together; In order to lead a better education to off springs, we should put parallel emphasis on the influence of groups of people, thus foster correct world outlook, view on life and values.

重复观点，升华主题至下一代教育。

总结小凝的文章：

整篇都是学习！学习学习再学习！

思路非常清晰，读这样的文章一点都不累，查了一下近650个字，相当充实，不管是举例还是语言，感觉都是无可挑剔啊~

绝对是一篇值得学习的范文~

改也改不出什么问题啦~一下子感觉差距好大啊~学习小凝！

==================================================

改小谦~多改一篇试试~

When it comes to the issue of the study of history, some people think it places too much emphasis on individuals, considering the prevalence of the Great man theory which explains history by great men. However, accumulating evidences suggest that the study of history concerns about economy, cultures, politics and laws in general, but not overemphasis individuals. In my point of view, both the famous few and groups of people have been reasonably emphasized.
在历史的研究中，两者都受到重视。

First of all, the study of history does not put too much emphasis on individuals. To make this clear, an analysis of the study of history is necessary. History is the study of human past, which narrates the events happen【happenging】 in the past and analyzes the causes and effects of them【cause to, effects of 介词的使用不一致哦~】. History studies the culture, science, people, economy and policies in the past. Individuals are involved in the events and each individual did do something that makes history move steps. Therefore, the study of history concerns all the events in the past not only some individuals.

历史的研究涵盖所有方面的时间，并非仅限于个人。【这一段逻辑分明~】

However, there were some individuals to whom historians need pay attention exist. For one thing, they did have great impacts on society. Like, Martin Luther King who leaded the movement to liberate the blacks, and Mahatma Gandhi, the pre-eminent leader of India during the Indian Independence Movement. For another, we could always learn something from historic individuals as history tends to repeat. We could learn from success and therefore predict【不知道这里是不是应该用predicting】 failure. We could learn how Edison and Newton became great inventors and the mistakes made by Hitler and Saddam Hussein. Hence, some historic individuals deserve us to study【这里不太清楚是否可以用这种表达方式，感觉更多情况下是用deserve to do，或者deserve that...】, which means these individuals are not overemphasized.

部分的名人应当被重视，因为：他们对社会有重大影响；我们可以从他们身上得到学习。这并不是过分强调。【例子很多很恰当~段落条理清晰】

Moreover, people who make great contributions to society but have been forgotten are memorized as a group.【我觉得这里说了memorized就不要在之前说forgotten了，而且这一段主要是说我们没有忘记他们，为什么还要再这里说被忘记了呢~供参考~】 Whether they are common or do not have great leaders to be remembered,【这一句没有读懂~】the study of history does include their contributions. For example, we do not know the names of the people who built the Great Wall in China, but we do know there was a group of workers who completed a gorgeous project and helped Chinese people defense invaders. Many art works left without the name of the makers, but we do memorize the ones who have such deft hands.
群体的贡献没有被遗忘，而是以团队的形式被记住。

In conclusion, individuals who are just one part of history do not be overemphasized. Although history studies some individuals who have great impacts for they deserve to be pay attention to, we do not ignore other parts in the history. We learn from those groups of people who also left great impacts but no names as well.

总结小谦的文章：

整篇文章十分流畅，条理脉络也非常清晰~值得学习~

不过我查了一下总共的字数，400出头一点~建议在语言上再斟酌一下，虽然AW好像不是特别看重辞藻，但是如果小谦的文章能看上去更流畅语言更美的话，我想整篇文章就更充实了吧~

一点点小建议~供参考~学习小谦的写作条理。

==================================================

改小C

The author asserts that the historical study devote【devote只有及物动词的用法吧~】 into famous few rather than groups of people, which is not appropriate. I can't deny that the groups of people were necessary in order to make things happened. But, famous few who function as a key role in a historical event or trend are much more representativeness【representative】 and valuable for study. They are the creators of the history. So they really deserved【s】 to be emphasis【ed】 in history today.

The famous few got power to take charge of the group of people. Though their diesel【这里是什么意思啊？】 was accomplished by the group of people, their words still weighted a lot. What they left for the world is valuable for history study and their influence remains until today. Alexander the Great, the most celebrated member of the Argead Dynasty, created one of the largest empires in ancient history. He was known to be undefeated in battle and is considered one of the most successful commanders of all time. He is one of the most famous figures of antiquity, and is remembered for his tactical ability, his conquests, and for spreading Greek culture into the East. His accomplishments and legacy have been preserved and depicted in many ways. While the soldiers who help him to get all this were function as a group of assistants and can not be told the name by people today.【因为前面描述亚历山大的句子精美漂亮，感觉这里对于士兵的对比显得有些少，最好再能叙述一下吧~个人意见】He was the one make【making】 decision and show【showing】 ambitious【ambitions】.
【the famous few是管理智慧群体的决策者】

The famous few who got extraordinary insight and wonderful talent can enlighten the group of people. They were usually the core role in some historical trend. During the Renaissance, there came out numbers of famous few, Raphael, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and also Masaccio, Brunelleschi est. What they achieved at that time profoundly affect human intellecture life not only in early period of time, but today as well. It's their great minds that push the civilization to go forward.【学习！】They are the source of Humanism; Study in them can help us understand the origin of the human culture. And the group of people in the world of all ages also is influenced by their intellective power.
【the famous few可以启蒙普通人，文艺复兴的例子好棒！】

The famous few who were earnest about reforming had chosen a different way from the group of people that they create a new branch of human civilization. Martin Luther, a German priest and professor of theology, initiated the Protestant Reformation which established Protestantism as a constituent branch of contemporary Christianity. When Martin Luther published The Ninety-Five Theses in 1517, and concluded in 1648 with the Treaty of Westphalia that ended one hundred and thirty-one years of consecutive European religious wars. What he had done had impacted the world's religion pattern. Though the group of people had involved in the event in some ways, they wouldn’t be written in history books, for they choosing a way that others had already gone through.

【the famous few开创了不同的道路】

In conclusion, it was the famous few that reflect the whole historical delineation. They were the heroes of a certain event and trend. Studying in them can help us grab the essential part of the history. They are the few who represent the whole.

总结：

整篇文章充满了好词好句！小C的例子看来都是下功夫搜集而来的~好棒！

中间三段都是并列说明the famous few的意义重大，对比了the groups of people~感觉结构清晰，论证也是~学习！

谦行天下UID: 2797557

要跟改我作业的童鞋说声对不起，写得太烂了，词藻匮乏，知识匮乏
忏悔
When it comes to the issue of the study of history, some people think it places too much emphasis on individuals, considering the prevalence of the Great man theory which explains history by great men. However, accumulating evidence suggest that the study of history that concerns about economy, cultures, politics and laws in general. In my point of view, the most significant events and trends in history could both be made by the famous few and groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.

First of all, the study of history does not put too much emphasis on individuals. To make this clear, an analysis of the study of history is necessary. History is the study of human past, who narrate the event happen in the past and analysis the cause and effect of events. History studies the culture, science, people, economy and new policies of the past. Individuals are involved in the events and each individual does something that make history move a step.

However, some individuals do need to pay attention to. For one thing, they do have great impact on society. Like, Martin Luther King who leaded the movement to liberate the blacks, and Mahatma Gandhi, the pre-eminent leader of India during the Indian Independence Movement. For another, we could always learn something from historic individuals. History tends to repeat. We could learn from success and predict failure. We could learn how Edison and Newton become great inventors and the mistakes made by Hitler and Saddam Hussein. Hence, some historic individuals deserve us to study.

Moreover, the people who make great contribution to society but have been forgotten are memorized as a group. Whether they are common or do not have great leaders to be remembered, the study of history do include their contribution. For example, we do not know the names of the people who built the Great Wall in China, but we do know there was a group of workers who completed a gorgeous project and helped Chinese people defense invaders. Many artworks left without the name of the makers, but we do memorize the ones who have such deft hands.

In conclusion, individuals are just one part of history. Some individuals deserve to be study for their great impact. We learn from history. Besides, we learn from those groups of people left great impact but no names as well.

——————第一次自改文————————————
感谢creative，点到的主要是偏题问题，个人还是团体被重视了而不是论述个人还是团体在写历史，我思考，主要就偏题问题，改正如下：
It is very comfortalbe to read your comment about my essay. You pointed out my good and resonably put through your results. I appreciate it.  
When it comes to the issue of the study of history, some people think it places too much emphasis on individuals, considering the
prevalence of the Great man theory which explains history by great men. However, accumulating evidences suggest that the study of history concerns about economy, cultures, politics and laws in general, but not overemphasis individuals. In my point of view, both the famous few and groups of people have been reasonably emphasized.

First of all, the study of history does not put too much emphasis on individuals. To make this clear, an analysis of the study of history is necessary. History is the study of human past, which narrates the events happen in the past and analyzes the causes and effects of them. History studies the culture, science, people, economy and policies in the past. Individuals are involved in the events and each individual did do something that makes history move steps. Therefore, the study of history concerns all the events in the past not only some individuals.

However, there were some individuals to whom historians need pay attention exist. For one thing, they did have great impacts on society. Like, Martin Luther King who leaded the movement to liberate the blacks, and Mahatma Gandhi, the pre-eminent leader of India during the Indian Independence Movement. For another, we could always learn something from historic individuals as history
tends to repeat. We could learn from success and therefore predict failure. We could learn how Edison and Newton became great inventors and the mistakes made by Hitler and Saddam Hussein. Hence, some historic individuals deserve us to study, which means these individuals are not overemphasized.

Moreover, people who make great contributions to society but have been forgotten are memorized as a group. Whether they are common or do not have great leaders to be remembered, the study of history does include their contributions. For example, we do not know the names of the people who built the Great Wall in China, but we do know there was a group of workers who completed a gorgeous project and helped Chinese people defense invaders. Many art works left without the name of the makers, but we do memorize the ones who have such deft hands.

In conclusion, individuals who are just one part of history do not be overemphasized. Although history studies some individuals who have great impacts for they deserve to be pay attention to, we do not ignore other parts in the history. We learn from those groups of people who also left great impacts but no names as well.

————————————第二次自改文——————————
发现我的字数扩不多，我得多背一些东西
When it comes to the issue of the study of history, some people think it places too much attention on individuals, considering the prevalence of the Great man theory which explains history by great men. However, accumulating evidences suggest that the study of history concerns about economy, cultures, politics and laws in general, but not overemphasis individuals. In my point of view, both the famous few and groups of people have been reasonably emphasized.


First of all, the study of history does not put too much emphasis on individuals. To make this clear, an analysis of the study of history is necessary. History is the study of human past, which narrates the events happening in the past and analyzes the causes and effects. History studies the culture, science, people, economy and policies in the past. Individuals are involved in the events and each individual do something that makes history move steps. Therefore, the study of history concerns all the events in the past not only some individuals.

However, there exist some individuals to whom historians need pay attention. For one thing, they did have great impacts on society. Like, Martin Luther King who leaded the movement to liberate the blacks, and Mahatma Gandhi, the pre-eminent leader of India during the Indian Independence Movement. For another, we could always learn something from historic individuals as history tends to repeat. We could learn from success and therefore avoiding failure. We could learn how Edison and Newton became great scientists and the mistakes made by Hitler and Saddam Hussein. Hence, some historic individuals deserve to study, which means these individuals are not overemphasized.

Moreover, people who make great contributions to society are memorized as a group. Whether they are common or do not have great leaders to be remembered, the study of history does include their contributions. For example, we do not know the names of the people who built the Great Wall in China, but we do know there was a group of workers who completed a gorgeous project and helped Chinese people defense invaders. Many art works left without the name of the makers, but we do memorize the ones who have such deft hands.


In conclusion, individuals who are just one part of history do not be overemphasized. Although history studies some individuals who have great impacts for they deserve to be pay attention to, we do not ignore other parts in the history. We learn from those groups of people who also left great impacts but no names as well.

谦行天下UID: 2797557

First revision of Issue 48 by Creative:

Blue means my suggestion and comment

Purple means my general advise on a paragraph or whole passage

The statement claims that the majority of historians' attention is paid on some individuals, which is not reasonable since the history is usually determined by groups of people rather than just few superstars. I would like to argue that individuals have not been overemphasized in the study of history, in particular the main branches of pure history, such as Sociology and Anthropology, although [although means transition which seems to be misused here, since I couldn’t find a clear corresponding between your former and latter part of this sentence] I totally agree that the development of the human society has never been completely determined by the famous few.
//It is good to clearly state you standpoint in the first place. But, I am confused with the last sentence.  

First of all, one should note that the study of history is different from some literatures on the topic of history, especially historical novels and bibliographies of “the famous few”, [from which most of our normal people learn the history][I suggest you to delete this sentence because it is not convincing that most normal people learn the history from novels and bibliographies when they do not belong to real history, or you could write like this ""from which most of our normal people get the misleading concept that history mostly focuses on the famouse few]. One can see this by noting two aspects: First one is that if one really carefully read those rigorous works done by historians, even just history textbooks, would find that most part of them focuses [nowhere on individuals][here are you mean focuses on every individuals? It is strange that you put through in this way]. Most points given by this kind of books are supported by statistical data, which is not close related to few important persons. Second one is that people who feel that the past of our human society is full of stories about heroes can not be truly historians.[It is better to reorganized using an outsider of the study of history] Take myself for example, when I am reading history, I do not care too much about the fundamental structures of human society or the basic relationships among different social classes, which are actually important topics in real historical researches. I prefer to read the legends of  heroes and elites, not for that they are dominating the direction of history, but their attractive personalities and unusual shining experiences. This emphasis on individuals is not due to how historians study history, but simply what people like to know from history.
//It is a good paragragh with convicing points except some tiny flaws.

Even though it is true that in certain areas of history, such as the history of literature, most attentions are paid on individuals, these attentions are usually serving as examples of groups of people because of their trenchant characteristics and outstanding achievements that should be known by readers, and therefore can not be thought as being overemphasized. One may ask himself/herself that without listing those great writers and poets how a book of the history of literature can be organized. The answer must be terrible. Furthermore, the individuals cited in this kind of study are not appearing by themselves but as icons of groups of people, which may have the similar style of writing or live in the same times. Writing these icons enables the reader to capture overviews of certain groups of people. That is how historians tell us what groups of people did in the past, which should not be and actually never have been overlooked.
//A good paragragh! Your basic idea is that "some minority areas focusing more on individuals are really aiming at tell readers about the groups" which is true, but I could not stop wondering the question that what about some great leaders who have great impacts on society.

Last but not least, from logical point of view, it is unreasonable to ask historians to always emphasize identities of groups of people. What enables people distinguish individuals and groups of people in the history is that the former have their easy-to-tell identities but the later, when one is looking at every single element of it, have not. However, groups as a whole has been emphasized for a long time. A daily life example could be that it is easy for a person who loves history to tell others what are the main difference between people lived in 19 century and nowadays. Where did he learn this? History books. Meanwhile, it is utterly possible for the same history fan to tell others what an old man called Bill lived in Livingston, a small town in Philadelphia, was doing in 1854, the year Abraham Lincoln made his Peoria Speech. Is it because historians placed too much emphasis on President Lincoln to overlook the lives of Bill from Philadelphia? The answer is absolutely no because that for almost every history book of the United States in 19 to 20 centuries can tell readers [what are the differences of people's lives][It is right to say as what the differences of people's lives are], including Bill's, before and after the Civil War, and probably using more space than Lincoln's political live.
// The author states a resonable idea to support his/her essay. The sentences of the examples are beatiful.

The assertion that the study of history focuses so much on individuals that [may be you miss a verb like ignore] the identities of groups of people, which are the real driving forces of the development of history as most people, including me, believe, is consequently unconvincingly biased, for the majority of rigorous pure history researches are focusing on common people and some minority areas focusing more on individuals are really aiming at tell readers about the groups. And logically, alternating the focus from individuals to groups as what the statement expect might be not desirably feasible.

Comment: It is a good essay with logical and comprehensive understanding of this issue. The small suggestion is that you omit to discuss one situation of some charimas leaders or great person's impacts to society, which makes your essay less persuasive.
You could use complex sentence which shows your strong ability of English writing.

——————————分割线————————————————————————
The first revision of [9]Polo

As the statement of the author indicates, individuals who are important to specific events and trends in history have been overstressed ,while the groups of people's identities have been neglected during the study of history. In my view, the latter's significance should not be omitted, but achievements of individuals should be given more emphasis.
//In this issue, while the topic talks about whether or not the study of individuals has been overemphasized in the study of history, you talked about in your opion what should to do regardless what you think whether or not individuals have been overemphasized in history. In another words, you need state whether you agree or disagree with the statement in this issue.

Admittedly, groups of people play a relatively important role in making the most significant events and trends in history. Without struggle and efforts of the masses, china[China] cannot conquer the foreign invaders, survive from the cruel wars and develop into a new stage. Without endeavours and great efforts of the masses, the French Revolution cannot obtain the final success , the autocratic monarchy cannot be demolished and the ancien[a wrong word] regime would not come to the end.

[Even so, however,][In my opinion, these two transition words can be deleted for you used 'admittedly' in the former paragraph] we should lay more stress on the individuals who are key to momentous events and movements. As we know, a great leader can lead a great era and there are plenty of examples we can enumerate to embody it. As the above paragraph has referred to, the establishment of new China cannot brought to fruition without efforts of diligent and brave Chinese,but leadership of the great leader chair Mao contributed much more to it. He designated the onward direction for China and guided Chinese to advance for new life. Another example is Alexander the Great, the king of Macedon, the leader of the Corinthian League, and the conqueror of Persia, succeeded in forging the largest Western empire of the ancient world. He has genius as a military leader when he was young;[ in 331 B.C. he entered Mesopotamia where he met the Persian king once more at Gaugamela, east of the Tigris River. ][this sentence you can omit it, because the time and places of the event do not help your statement]In spite of the fact that his army was smaller than that of the Persians, Alexander's superior tactics won the field.

[you could add 'on the other hand' here, because it is another aspect of the central sentence in your former paragraph]A cruel leader can lead a gloomy era. For instance, Hitler Adolf, who is Dictator[dictator?] and leader of the German Nazi movement, is regarded as the most pivotal prime mover of the World War II. Hitler led his people to a shameful defeat without precedent[nice sentence!]; his political and strategic ambitions have created a dividing line in the history of this turbulent and tormented century. In his time, German society had rallied behind him: the judicial, the educational, the industrial and the economic establishments gave him their support.[gave Hitler support?]


Aside from the study of history, much emphasis on individuals also can help us learn history. It can be easy to remember the specific events by pointing out specific individuals. In addition, some prominent figures can be be emulated as role models and we can promote ourselves by learning their advantages.

In sum, much emphasis on individuals bring many benefits to us. As long as we don not ignore groups of people's identities, we should focus much more attention on individuals in study of history.

//you have used persuative examples in this essay. However, in this issue it was whether or not history overemphasized individuals, while your essay talked about what should to do without talking about the reality.

===========二改 小凝==============================================

When you open the history books, different familiar names will greet the eyes, Napoléon Bonaparte, the one rose to prominence under the First French Republic and led successful campaigns against the First and Second Coalitions arrayed against France, Bernard Law Montgomery, who successfully commanded Allied forces at the Battle of EI Alamein, a major turning point in the Western Desert Campaign during World War II, Henry Ford, the American founder of the Ford Motor Company and father of modern assembly lines used in mass production, etc.[I want to recite them] However, we can hardly find any description about people’s effort. Indeed, without those famous leaders, the world may be still in a state of disunity; without those icons from different fields, the world may still get stuck in the rut. However[better to use'after all', since you just use however in your former sentence], without the support from the groups of people, those well-known guys would not have such an influence on the fields they belong to.

Those stars that are still shining in people’s memory, are an indispensable part as the wheel of history rolls on. Their excellent leadership, deep faith and remarkable intelligence, strengthen national cohesion and social integration[aren't these phase but not a sentence?]. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the spiritual leader of Indian, devoted his life to employing non-cooperation, non-violence and peaceful resistance as his “weapons” in the struggle again British. At the call of Gandhi, hundreds of millions of people who were divided by caste, religion, language and ethnicity, began to uniform and fight against the British rule over India. Under the leadership of Winston Churchill, the British finally beat back the attack of Nazi Germany and won the World War II. With these leaders’ charisma, people are awakened and pulled together to fight for the dreams.

Marking down such feats of strength of great leaders in history books is a good way to keep it fresh in our memory. Thus, their spirits, great wisdom, steadfast determination to achieve the goals and experiences to deal with different obstacles, hand down from generation to generation, accumulating more and more cultural sediment in the way of our development. When reading their glorious deeds, we get inspiration and are encouraged to seek after our goals.

However, a play will never turn out to be successful if there is no actor but only directors. The same goes for the relationship between common people and great leaders. Suppose that there were no troops in the command of Churchill, how could he work out his plan and fight back the assault from Nazi Germany? How did Gandhi conduct the movement if he had no followers? Without the support and aid from people, their plans and strategies are just blueprints that could never come true. Instead, people, are the cement and bricks that build up their dreams.

Moreover, in history, it’s not uncommon to find that even though lack of outstandings’ guiding, people can still get together and have a great influence over the world. The Chartist Movement, led by British working class, with six million signatures presented to Parliament after a huge meeting on Kennington Common, achieved great prominence in the story of Chartism. Furthermore, the cultures of various nations, the good merits of human, the large amount of gismos, are not only the result of famous guys, but mostly the crystallization of groups of people’s wisdom. With people’s greatly importance in human’s development, we shouldn’t omit its struggle and effort, which will be like betraying history. What’s more, it does remind us that once you can get the support from your people, you are likely to be successful.

In conclusion, the world is not made of separated persons, but the different nations. Without the effort and support from nations, the history is just pieces that cannot be glued together; In order to lead a better education to off springs, we should put parallel emphasis on the influence of groups of people, thus foster correct world outlook, view on life and values.
我认为有一点点偏题，从题目“The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. ”来看

题目主要讨论的history 有没有过多的强调个人而忽略了群体，题目后面的句子看似解释第一句。。

小凝讨论的是，个人和群体对历史的作用，认为我们应该如何去重视，而没有从历史本身的角度去说明问题

小凝的例子很饱满，文采也很好

polosongruiUID: 2595436

1
-----------左看看，右看看，都觉得自己的文章胡扯了一堆，我是个绝顶的历史菜鸟，请大牛们帮帮我啦，乌啦啦！Polo谢谢你们啊---------------------

As the statement of the author indicates, individuals who are important to specific events and trends in history have been overstressed ,while the groups of people's identities have been neglected during the study of history. In my view, the latter's significance should not be omitted, but achievements of individuals should be given more emphasis.

Admittedly, groups of people play a relatively important role in making the most significant events and trends in history. Without struggle and efforts of the masses, china cannot conquer the foreign invaders, survive from the cruel wars and develop into a new stage. Without endeavours and great efforts of the masses, the French Revolution cannot obtain the final success , the autocratic monarchy cannot be demolished and the ancien regime would not come to the end.

Even so, however, we should lay more stress on the individuals who are key to momentous events and movements. As we know, a great leader can lead a great era and there are plenty of examples we can enumerate to embody it. As the above paragraph has referred to, the establishment of new China cannot brought to fruition without efforts of diligent and brave Chinese,but leadership of the great leader chair Mao contributed much more to it. He designated the onward direction for China and guided Chinese to advance for new life. Another example is Alexander the Great, the king of Macedon, the leader of the Corinthian League, and the conqueror of Persia, succeeded in forging the largest Western empire of the ancient world. He has genius as a military leader when he was young; in 331 B.C. he entered Mesopotamia where he met the Persian king once more at Gaugamela, east of the Tigris River. In spite of the fact that his army was smaller than that of the Persians, Alexander's superior tactics won the field.

A cruel leader can lead a gloomy era. For instance, Hitler Adolf, who is Dictator and leader of the German Nazi movement, is regarded as the most pivotal prime mover of the World War II. Hitler led his people to a shameful defeat without precedent; his political and strategic ambitions have created a dividing line in the history of this turbulent and tormented century. In his time, German society had rallied behind him: the judicial, the educational, the industrial and the economic establishments gave him their support.

Aside from the study of history, much emphasis on individuals also can help us learn history. It can be easy to remember the specific events by pointing out specific individuals. In addition, some prominent figures can be be emulated as role models and we can promote ourselves by learning their advantages.

In sum, much emphasis on individuals bring many benefits to us. As long as we don not ignore groups of people's identities, we should focus much more attention on individuals in study of history.

------------ 一自改 灰常感谢小谦 他的文章给了我许多提示 乌啦啦----------------
As the statement of the author indicates, individuals who are important to specific events and trends in history have been overstressed ,while the groups of people's identities have been neglected during the study of history. In my view, the few famous have not been overemphasized and they deserve the emphasis; groups of people's identities have not been omitted as well.

Admittedly, groups of people play a relatively important role in making the most significant events and trends in history. Without struggle and efforts of the masses, China cannot conquer the foreign invaders, survive from the cruel wars and develop into a new stage. Without endeavours and great efforts of the masses, the French Revolution cannot obtain the final success, the autocratic monarchy cannot be demolished and the ancien regime would not come to the end. The Great Wall agglomerates the perspiration and inspiration of Chinese people; the Pyramid opens out the endless creativity and imagination of Egyptian. Despite that we are unable to know the names of the creators who have made a significant influence on human's history, we also look up to them and give the highest admiration to them. So we have never forgotten the groups of ordinary people.

Moreover, much attention have been given to the individuals who are key to momentous events and movements. As we know, a great leader can lead a great era and there are plenty of examples we can enumerate to embody it. As the above paragraph has referred to, the establishment of new China cannot brought to fruition without efforts of diligent and brave Chinese,but leadership of the great leader chair Mao contributed much more to it. He designated the onward direction for China and guided Chinese to advance for new life. So when it comes to the the founding of New China, there is no occasion not to refer to chair Mao and to give the enough emphasis to him. Another example is Alexander the Great, the king of Macedon, the leader of the Corinthian League, and the conqueror of Persia, succeeded in forging the largest Western empire of the ancient world. He has genius as a military leader when he was young; in spite of the fact that his army was smaller than that of the Persians, Alexander's superior tactics won the field, Mesopotamia. His braveness and talent in leadership are worthy of our focuses.

On the other hand, a cruel leader can lead a gloomy era. For instance, Hitler Adolf, who is Dictator and leader of the German Nazi movement, is regarded as the most pivotal prime mover of the World War II. Hitler led his people to a shameful defeat without precedent; his political and strategic ambitions have created a dividing line in the history of this turbulent and tormented century. In the study of history, we should give enough emphasis to this kind of individual and learn lessons from him or her to avoid the same tragedy and get together to build a harmonious world.

In sum, we have never neglected groups of people who make a great difference on history. Although their names have not been written in history, their Great historical achievements sink deep into the hearts of people. What is more, it is necessary to focus much attention to the few famous who also play a key role in making history and some prominent figures can be emulated as role models and we can promote ourselves by learning their advantages.

----------------thanks so much to lty!---------------------

As the statement of the author indicates, individuals who are important to specific events and trends in history have been overstressed ,while the groups of people's identities have been neglected during the study of history. In my view, the few famous have not been overemphasized and groups of people's identities have not been omitted as well.

Admittedly, groups of people play a relatively important role in making the most significant events and trends in history. Without struggle and efforts of the masses, China cannot conquer the foreign invaders, survive from the cruel wars and develop into a new stage. Without endeavours and great efforts of the masses, the French Revolution cannot obtain the final success that democracy
and republicanism replaced the absolute monarchy in France. The Great Wall agglomerates the perspiration and inspiration of Chinese people; the Pyramid opens out the endless creativity and imagination of Egyptian. Despite that we are unable to know the names of the creators who have made a significant influence on human's history, we also look up to them and give the highest admiration for them. So we have never forgotten the groups of ordinary people.

Moreover, the few famous deserve our enough attention. As we know, a great leader can lead a great era and there are plenty of examples we can enumerate to embody it. As the above paragraph has referred to, the establishment of new China cannot brought to fruition without efforts of diligent and brave Chinese,but leadership of the great leader chair Mao contributed much more to it. He designated the onward direction for China and guided Chinese to advance for new life. So when it comes to the the founding of New China, there is no occasion not to refer to chair Mao and give him enough emphasis. Another example is Alexander the Great, the king of Macedon, the leader of the Corinthian League, and the conqueror of Persia, succeeded in establishing the largest Western empire of the ancient world. He has genius as a military leader when he was young; in spite of the fact that his army was smaller than that of the Persians, Alexander's superior tactics won the field, Mesopotamia. His braveness and talent in leadership are worthy of our focuses.

On the other hand, a cruel leader can lead a gloomy era. For instance, Hitler Adolf, who is Dictator and leader of the German Nazi movement, is regarded as the most pivotal prime mover of the World War II. Hitler led his people to a shameful defeat without precedent; his political and strategic ambitions have created a dividing line in the history of this turbulent and tormented century. In the study of history, we should also give enough emphasis to this kind of individual and learn lessons from him or her to avoid the same tragedy and get together to build a harmonious world.

In sum, we have never neglected groups of people who make a great difference on history. Although their names have not been written in history, their Great historical achievements sink deep into the hearts of people. What is more, it is necessary to focus much attention to the few famous who also play a key role in making history and some prominent figures can be emulated as role models and we can promote ourselves by learning their advantages.

polosongruiUID: 2595436

2

--------------------------一改 lty ---------------------
Since a long time ago, there was always a pubic controversy in regard to the issue of who should be put more emphasis on when we studied the history. And now, someone like the speaker of this topic argue（觉得要加-s） that we should pay more attention to the groups of people who have played important roles in the history. Others on the other hand hold the opinion that it is right to value more on individuals in the study of history. As far as I am concerned, we should respect groups of people who had made many significant contributions, but at the same time, we have to put more emphasis on the famous in history.

Admittedly distinct groups of people who are the main force to make significant events and trends in history should never be forgot. Just in last year, Hussein Obama won the seat of the president of the United States, and becoming the first president with a black African descent because of（为什么是because啊，怎么理解啊） the African American who have strove for their rights hundreds of years. Without these people, American people may still discriminate them, which will stagnate the development of American society. Furthermore(我觉得这个词有层隐含的递进关系在里面，韦氏解释in addition to what precedes 牛津高阶中有Furthermore is used especially to add a point to an argument.所以觉得应该是对前面那个例子的补充，但这里是重新开启的一个例子，所以感觉用besides好点), without the dilligent and brave Chinese people, the world may never go bake to peace after the fascist provoked the World-War-2, in which period China also had domestic affairs. However, facing the double problems, the group of Chinese people leaded by president Mao, overcame all the difficulties and established a new era of China.

Therefore, groups of people should not be forgot, but without leaders, they may never gather to put efforts on altering the history.（这句转折很漂亮！） After Hegel, who insisted on the role of "great men" in history, with his famous statement about Napoleon, "I saw the Spirit on his horse", and Thomas Carlyle argued that history was the biography of a few central individuals or heroes. For example, when we talk to the equal rights of African American in the USA, Martin Luther King always appears into our mind first. Without the impressive speech（我觉得这里再把那个演讲的名字写出来吧，i have a dream） released by him, African American may never get together to fight for their human rights and change the status where they were. Thus not only African American but also all of us regard Martin as a hero and we should place more emphasis on him without any doubts.

On the other hand acephalous groups will have no disciplines, no rules and no targets, and this kind of groups are doomed to fail. Without an excellent leader, everyone in the group wants to obtain their own interest, and it is hard for them to tie their hearts or board on the same boat. Even if they gather to have the same goal, without disciplines or proper ways, they can never achieve it. For instance, in some school, their are lots of research groups, whose members have a same goal, but most of them cannot finish the research because they do not have an excellent group leader who can tie the members together and guide them to the right way.
//我觉得此处应该换一个历史题材的例子。因为毕竟对于个体和群体的讨论都是在是谁创造历史更多的前提下进行的，也就是说我们现在的观点是要说the few individuals在创造历史中作用更大，影响更大。你给我的那本书中有一句我觉得特别好：it seems that key individuals almost invariably provide the initial spark for those trends. 正是有了the few individuals这样的激发作用，才会有一段有一段significant历史。这段你应该是想要从反面去强调the few individuals的激发作用，举个历史题材的例子论证这一点吧！

For the reasons presented above, I strongly commit to the notion that we should put more emphasis on individuals, not by nameless, faceless groups. It is the famous few that determine the orientation of the history
//文章整体不错的，要比我的好不知多少倍了！只是想和你探讨一个问题。我总觉得我们忽略了题目中的一个大背景，就是这些所谓的强调多或强调少都是在研究历史的时候产生的问题，所以感觉我们都把study这个词忘了，看了那本书上的范文，所以想到了这一点，那个范文就是一直站在研究历史这个位置上去论述两个强调轻重对于研究历史的影响，有个地方这么写的：any historian would agree that studying the groups of people who rode the wave of Gutenberg's invention is secondary in understanding history to learning about the root historical cause of that wave. Generally speaking, then, undue attention to the efforts and contributions of various groups tends to obscure the cause-and-effect relationship with which the study of history is chiefly concerned.他这个就是在小描述了一下Gutenberg的例子后，论述对于个体的强调在研究历史中的作用。感觉我们只是一直在说名人的作用更大，所以要强调他们。然后没有说强调他们之后对历史研究怎么了，或者说我们还没搞清一个概念就是什么历史研究，研究历史都研究什么，而通过我们的论证感觉研究历史就只是了解重大事件，而忽略了“研究”这个概念，应该包括在了解历史重大的基础上，分析文化，宗教，政治等问题，分析历史的前因后果等等。说了这么多，好像也没说清楚，到时再讨论吧，我觉得那个范文特别特别值得推敲！早上又看了一遍那片范文，觉得还是没说清楚，回头讨论吧！

--------------二 改谦行天下-----------------------------

When it comes to the issue of the study of history, some people think it places too much emphasis on individuals, considering the
prevalence of the Great man theory which explains history by great men. However, accumulating
evidences suggest that the study of history concerns about economy, cultures, politics and laws in general, but not overemphasis individuals. In my point of view, both the famous few and groups of people have been reasonably emphasized.

First of all, the study of history does not put too much emphasis on individuals. To make this clear, an analysis of the study of history is necessary. History is the study of human past,which narrates the
events happen(happened) in the past and
analyzes the
causes and effects of them. History studies the culture, science, people(总觉得这个词放在这里好突兀), economy and
policies in the past. Individuals are involved in the events and each individual
did do something that
makes history move steps. Therefore, the study of history concerns all the events in the past not only some individuals.

However, there were（are） some individuals to whom historians need pay attention exist（这个可以删掉了，毕竟there已经表达了“存在，有”的意思。）. For one thing, they did have
great impacts on society. Like, Martin Luther King
who leaded the movement to liberate the blacks, and Mahatma Gandhi, the pre-eminent leader of India during the Indian Independence Movement. For another, we could always learn something from historic individuals
as history
tends to repeat. We could learn from success and
therefore predict failure（预言失败！！感觉应该是避免失败吧）. We could learn how Edison and Newton
became great inventors（觉得说Newton是发明家有点怪） and the mistakes made by Hitler and Saddam Hussein. Hence, some historic individuals deserve us to study, which means these individuals are not overemphasized.

Moreover, people who make great contributions to society but have been forgotten are memorized as a group. Whether they are common or do not have great leaders to be remembered, the study of history does include their contributions. For example, we do not know the names of the people who built the Great Wall in China, but we do know there was a group of workers who completed a gorgeous project and helped Chinese people defense invaders. Many art works left without the name of the makers, but we do memorize the ones who have such deft hands.

In conclusion, individuals who are just one
part of history do not be overemphasized. Although history studies some individuals who have great impacts for they deserve to be pay attention to, we do not ignore other parts in the history. We learn from those groups of people who also left great impacts but no names as well.
//整篇文章很不错，尤其我觉得你的这篇是我见过除了范文外，对题目把握最好的一个，你的角度特别好，即我们并没有overemphasize the individuals，而是他们deserve the emphasis，并且我们并没有忽略对group的重视，尤其你对group的把握，很到位，就是那些对历史产生重大影响而没有留下名的人。提一个小问题，就是在例子的描述上更饱满一些，逻辑的论证都很到位，就是例子再饱满一些就更完美了！




------------------- 三 改francene-------------------

Issue 48

It is no exaggeration to say that in everybody’s heart, there is a hero. This can be attributing to be one part of human nature. We can see many super heroes in move scenes, We have Superman, ,Spiderman, and the only savior to world “Neo” in the very famous movie “Matrix”. There are so many heroes in the fantasy world, then what about the real world?

As somebody says, movie scene is the other side of mirror to our normal life.The fact is just like this. There are many super heroes in the long history of human development too. These heroes use their fabulous ability and imagination to change our world with their own power. In the physical field, without Thomas Edison, we may still live in darkness. In biology, Alexander Fleming’s discovery of penicillin claim that humankind finally have their own weapon to the battle with the bacteria. In the art field, Picasso change the traditional art to a more abstract way which thus open the screen of the modern art. In politics, without Nelson Mandera, we cannot imagine the South African black people can own such a racial equality as today. These extraordinary people are the milestones of the history, they use their individual
influence to
make the world become better and better.

Meanwhile, There are still groups of people who behind these historical heroes cannot be overlooked. In the letter to a scientist friend, English famous physicist Isaac Newton says:” If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”  The word “giants” here was referring to the scientific predecessors who studied in Newton’s realm. Before discovering his famous three laws, Newton was very interested in describing the various motion and force in a mathematical way. At that time, another physicist Kepler noticed that the planet went around in an elliptical path, but not circularly, but Kepler was not able to find a mathematical method to explain it. By reading many books of Kepler, Newton began to think deeply about this problem. Finally he discovered first law of motion which is one part of the basic discipline to explain the planetary motion. Actually, Newton was not only referring to the giants in physical field, but also in some other realms which is related to. He used to read some books of Aristotle where He could get some small inspiration(觉得这里应该是指灵感吧，不过感觉这么说有点奇怪，改成some sparks of inspiration怎么样？) . So, can we just say that Newton himself finds the physical law? The answer can be yes, yet also can be no.
We say that those key person is important for(to) history, but, do not look down upon the power of the group(groups) behind those glamorous and successful heroes. Can you imagine Newton would be one of this foremost scientific intellects without those achievements that those old generations
did(改成别的吧，感觉do achievement有点怪啊)?

In a word, in today’s information age, collaboration is more and more important for individual.
One hero is not enough, we need more utilization of other’s profits to create new things. The power of individual
is limited,
but（but转折有点太强烈了，不如换成while试试） the force of groups is infinity. Some extraordinary
person may
trigger very important revolutions ,whereas without the efforts done by a group of people in or before their age, they cannot achieve such a success.

//经lty的推荐，看了你的文章，很不错，有好多学习的地方，乌啦啦！然后想提点自己的意见，不合适的地方，我们讨论，别介意啊！觉得文章开头和第二段很精彩，第一段中提到好多我们熟悉的电影里的individuals，然后很流畅的过度到第二段，第二段以一种排比的形式列举了事例，绝顶优美的一段！赞一个，乌啦啦！然后第二段中举了Newton这个很好把握的例子！但是这个结尾，我觉得不是很好，尤其我觉得collaboration这个词很突兀，前面并没有提到合作这个概念，牛顿那个例子也只是说明了他是站在巨人们的肩膀上的，而仔细推敲你会发现，这些巨人们每个都可称得上是题目中的individuals，所以我觉得实在题目意思的理解上有点偏差，我理解题目中的那个groups指的是那些我们现在都没法知道他们名字的普通人，而不是只有很多individuals组成的groups。还有一点就是，我觉得这种行文的方式挺冒险的，即开头不直接提出自己的观点，而是在结尾提出自己的观点。

凝羽欲翔UID: 2733350

来晚了~~

When you open the history books, different familiar names will greet the eyes, Napoléon Bonaparte, the one rose to prominence under the First French Republic and led successful campaigns against the First and Second Coalitions arrayed against France, Bernard Law Montgomery, who successfully commanded Allied forces at the Battle of EI Alamein, a major turning point in the Western Desert Campaign during World War II, Henry Ford, the American founder of the Ford Motor Company and father of modern assembly lines used in mass production, etc. However, we can hardly find any description about people’s effort. Indeed, without those famous leaders, the world may be still in a state of disunity; without those icons from different fields, the world may still get stuck in the rut. However, without the support from the groups of people, those well-known guys would not have such an influence on the fields they belong to.

Those stars that are still shining in people’s memory, is an indispensable part as the wheel of history rolls on. Their excellent leadership, deep faith and remarkable intelligence, strengthen national cohesion and social integration. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the spiritual leader of Indian, devoted his life to employing non-cooperation, non-violence and peaceful resistance as his “weapons” in the struggle again British. At the call of Gandhi, hundreds of millions of people who were divided by caste, religion, language and ethnicity, began to uniform and fight against the British rule over India. Under the leadership of Winston Churchill, the British finally beat back the attack of Nazi Germany and won the World War II. With these leaders’ charisma, people are awakened and pull together to fight for the dreams.

Marking down such feats of strength of great leaders in history books is a good way to keep it fresh in our memory. Thus, their spirits, great wisdom, steadfast determination to achieve the goals and experiences to deal with different obstacles, hand down from generation to generation, accumulating more and more cultural sediment in the way of our development. When reading their glorious deeds, we get inspiration and are encouraged to seek after our goals.

However, a play will never turn out to be successful if there is no actor but only directors. The same goes for the relationship between common people and great leaders. Suppose that there were no troops in the command of Churchill, how could he work out his plan and fight back the assault from Nazi Germany? How did Gandhi conduct the movement if he had no followers? Without the support and aid from people, their plans and strategies are just blueprints that could never come true. Instead, people, are the cement and bricks that build up their dreams.

Moreover, in history, it’s not uncommon to find that even though lack of out-standings’ guiding, people can still get together and have a great influence over the world. The Chartist Movement, led by British working class, with six million signatures presented to Parliament after a huge meeting on Kennington Common, achieved great prominence in the story of Chartism. Furthermore, the cultures of various nations, the good merits of human, the large amount of gismos, are not only the result of famous guys, but mostly the crystallization of groups of people’s wisdom. With people’s greatly importance in human’s development, we shouldn’t omit its struggle and effort, which will be like betraying history. What’s more, it does remind us that once you can get the support from your people, you are likely to be successful.

In conclusion, the world is not made of separated persons, but the different nations. Without the effort and support from nations, the history is just pieces that cannot be glued together; In order to lead a better education to off springs, we should put parallel emphasis on the influence of groups of people, thus foster correct world outlook, view on life and values.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

一改~谢谢Agnes啦~

When you open the history books, different familiar names will greet the eyes, Napoléon Bonaparte, the one rose to prominence under the First French Republic and led successful campaigns against the First and Second Coalitions arrayed against France, Bernard Law Montgomery, who successfully commanded Allied forces at the Battle of EI Alamein, a major turning point in the Western Desert Campaign during World War II, Henry Ford, the American founder of the Ford Motor Company and father of modern assembly lines used in mass production, etc. However, we can hardly find any description about people’s effort. Indeed, without those famous leaders, the world may be still in a state of disunity; without those icons from different fields, the world may still get stuck in the rut. However, without the support from the groups of people, those well-known guys would not have such an influence on the fields they belong to.

Those stars that are still shining in people’s memory, are an indispensable part as the wheel of history rolls on. Their excellent leadership, deep faith and remarkable intelligence, strengthen national cohesion and social integration. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the spiritual leader of Indian, devoted his life to employing non-cooperation, non-violence and peaceful resistance as his “weapons” in the struggle again British. At the call of Gandhi, hundreds of millions of people who were divided by caste, religion, language and ethnicity, began to uniform and fight against the British rule over India. Under the leadership of Winston Churchill, the British finally beat back the attack of Nazi Germany and won the World War II. With these leaders’ charisma, people are awakened and pulled（老是细节的地方都没注意。。） together to fight for the dreams.

Marking down such feats of strength of great leaders in history books is a good way to keep it fresh in our memory. Thus, their spirits, great wisdom, steadfast determination to achieve the goals and experiences to deal with different obstacles, hand down from generation to generation, accumulating more and more cultural sediment in the way of our development. When reading their glorious deeds, we get inspiration and are encouraged to seek after our goals.

However, a play will never turn out to be successful if there is no actor but only directors. The same goes for the relationship between common people and great leaders. Suppose that there were no troops in the command of Churchill, how could he work out his plan and fight back the assault from Nazi Germany? How did Gandhi conduct the movement if he had no followers? Without the support and aid from people, their plans and strategies are just blueprints that could never come true. Instead, people, are the cement and bricks that build up their dreams.

Moreover, in history, it’s not uncommon to find that even though lack of outstandings’（嘿嘿~）guiding, people can still get together and have a great influence over the world. The Chartist Movement, led by British working class, with six million signatures presented to Parliament after a huge meeting on Kennington Common, achieved great prominence in the story of Chartism. Furthermore, the cultures of various nations, the good merits of human, the large amount of gismos, are not only the result of famous guys, but mostly the crystallization of groups of people’s wisdom. With people’s greatly importance in human’s development, we shouldn’t omit its struggle and effort, which will be like betraying history. What’s more, it does remind us that once you can get the support from your people, you are likely to be successful.

In conclusion, the world is not made of separated persons, but the different nations. Without the effort and support from nations, the history is just pieces that cannot be glued together; In order to lead a better education to off springs, we should put parallel emphasis on the influence of groups of people, thus foster correct world outlook, view on life and values.

凝羽欲翔UID: 2733350

一改 Creative~沾点灵气~


The statement claims that the majority of historians' attention is paid on some individuals, which is not reasonable since the history is usually determined by groups of people rather than just few superstars. I would like to argue that individuals have not been overemphasized in the study of history, in particular the main branches of pure history, such as Sociology and Anthropology, although I totally agree that the development of the human society has never been completely determined by the famous few.

First of all, one should note that the study of history is different from some literatures on the topic of history, especially historical novels and bibliographies of “the famous few”, from which most of our normal people learn the history. One can see this by noting two aspects: First one is that if one really carefully read those rigorous works done by historians, even just history textbooks, would find that most part of them focuses nowhere on individuals. Most points given by this kind of books are supported by statistical data, which is not close related to few important persons[If more specific data is showed, I think this viewpoint will be more convincing]. Second one is that people who feel that the past of our human society is full of stories about heroes can not be truly historians. Take myself for example, when I am reading history, I do not care too much about the fundamental structures of human society or the basic relationships among different social classes, which are actually important topics in real historical researches. I prefer to read the legends of  heroes and elites, not for that they are dominating the direction of history, but their attractive personalities and unusual shining experiences. This emphasis on individuals is not due to how historians study history, but simply what people like to know from history.[The second viewpoint is very attractive]

Even though it is true that in certain areas of history, such as the history of literature, most attentions are paid on individuals, these attentions are usually serving as examples of groups of people because of their trenchant(尖刻的，锋利的) characteristics and outstanding achievements that should be known by readers, and therefore can not be thought as being overemphasized. One may ask himself/herself that without listing those great writers and poets how a book of the history of literature can be organized. The answer must be terrible. Furthermore, the individuals cited in this kind of study are not appearing by themselves but as icons of groups of people, which may have the similar style of writing or live in the same times. Writing these icons enables the reader to capture overviews of certain groups of people. That is how historians tell us what groups of people did in the past, which should not be and actually never have been overlooked.

Last but not least, from logical point of view, it is unreasonable to ask historians to always emphasize identities of groups of people. What enables people distinguish individuals and groups of people in the history is that the former have their easy-to-tell identities but the later, when one is looking at every single element of it, have not. However, groups as a whole has been emphasized for a long time. A daily life example could be that it is easy for a person who loves history to tell others what are the main difference between people lived in 19 century and nowadays. Where did he learn this? History books. Meanwhile, it is utterly possible for the same history fan to tell others what an old man called Bill lived in Livingston, a small town in Philadelphia, was doing in 1854, the year Abraham Lincoln made his Peoria Speech. Is it because historians placed too much emphasis on President Lincoln to overlook the lives of Bill from Philadelphia? The answer is absolutely no because that for almost every history book of the United States in 19 to 20 centuries can tell readers what are the differences of people's lives, including Bill's, before and after the Civil War, and probably using more space than Lincoln's political live.（the example is vivid, but not so convincing, for it only mentions "almost every history book", but if the viewer says "I don't think so"? if more evidence are provided to prove your point, it will be better.）

The assertion that the study of history focuses so much on individuals that the identities of groups of people, which are the real driving forces of the development of history as most people, including me, believe, is consequently unconvincingly biased(a good expression), for the majority of rigorous pure history researches are focusing on common people and some minority areas focusing more on individuals are really aiming at tell(telling) readers about the groups. And logically, alternating the focus from individuals to groups as what the statement expect might be not desirably feasible(I doubt whether you can get such conclusion from your argument above, for you only show that it's not so reasonable to always emphasize identities of groups of people, but you says little about the alternative focus from individuals to groups).

Conclusion: The writer offers us a special and new angle to analyze the argument, it does widen my horizon~

一改 小谦~
When it comes to the issue of the study of history, some people think it places too much emphasis on individuals(I think it will be better if you can show the same meaning in a way that is different from the topic), considering the prevalence of the Great man theory(What is the name in Chinese?) which explains history by great men. However, accumulating evidences suggest that the study of history concerns about economy, cultures, politics and laws in general, but not overemphasis individuals. In my point of view, both the famous few and groups of people have been reasonably emphasized.

First of all, the study of history does not put too much emphasis on individuals. To make this clear, an analysis of the study of history is necessary. History is the study of human past, which narrates the events happened in the past and analyzes the causes and effects of them. History(historians??) studies the culture, science, people, economy and policies in the past. Individuals are involved in the events and each individual did(Why the former one use the present tense while the latter use past tense?) do something that makes history move steps(means the the history developed?). Therefore, the study of history concerns all the events in the past not only some individuals.

However, there were some individuals to whom historians need pay attention exist（How ahout "there exists some individuals.."?）. For one thing, they did have great impacts on society. Like, Martin Luther King who leaded the movement to liberate the blacks, and Mahatma Gandhi, the pre-eminent leader of India during the Indian Independence Movement. For another, we could always learn something from historic individuals as history tends to repeat. We could learn from success and therefore predict failure(I got a little bit confused here, why predict failure?). We could learn how Edison and Newton became great inventors and the mistakes made by Hitler and Saddam Hussein. Hence, some historic individuals deserve us to study, which means these individuals are not overemphasized.

Moreover, people who make great contributions to society but have been forgotten are memorized as a group. Whether they are common or do not have great leaders to be remembered, the study of history does include their contributions. For example, we do not know the names of the people who built the Great Wall in China, but we do know there was a group of workers who completed a gorgeous project and helped Chinese people defense invaders. Many art works left without the name of the makers, but we do memorize the ones who have such deft hands.

In conclusion, individuals who are just one part of history do not be overemphasized. Although history studies some individuals who have great impacts for they deserve to be pay attention to, we do not ignore other parts in the history. We learn from those groups of people who also left great impacts but no names as well.

In WORD, I find that there are only 430 words in your essay, do you think it's better to expand it a little bit?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second Revision for Agnes~

The speaker claims that the most significant historical events and trends were made possible by groups of people instead of the famous few, and that the study of history emphasize too much on the latter. Yet, I tend to disagree with the dual claim as in spite of the fact that group efforts should be emphasized, the importance of the famous few is still second to none（首屈一指的）.

First of all, compared with common people, the famous few deserve far more research value. Historians always trace the clue of the history by studying a few people who were well-known during that period, with less concern about the study of the common people. From my perspective, they do so for the sake of efficiency and quality of historical research. The famous few always take part in the event more initiatively and experience the history more vividly, thus providing the possibility of reflecting the country’s condition and the people’s livelihood. When studying a blank history, historians need to search for an entrance into it, which finally falls on the famous few. By following up their life, historians will quickly get far more branch knowledge than by tracing the life of those common people who can hardly provide myriad materials. Therefore, it is not a prejudice but a necessity for historians to lay more attention on the study of the famous few.（哈~怎么我就没想到那么多呢？？）


In addition, besides that the typical figures of those famous few benefit the study of history, their achievements are incomparable with those of others. when it comes to the most significant events or trends, what we recall mostly are the decision-makers in the events. For instance, assuming the Presidency at the depth of the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt helped the American people regain faith in themselves. His major decision-New Deal Program brought hope to the whole depressed nation, thus crowning him one of the greatest presidents in the history of the United States. Though the powerful efforts made by his citizens can not be overlooked, their role as executants can not equal that of Roosevelt. Without the brilliant and decisive decision made by Roosevelt, the American citizens may undergo the depression for a long time regardless of their together efforts.

However, just because the famous few are more likely to receive attention from historians, it does not mean the power of the entire group working behind the stage is not recognized. Since it is difficult to conclude all their performance and what they do are nearly all the same, researches always use a conception of “group efforts” to cover what they contribute to the events without naming them one after another. Instead of being forgotten, their contribution will still be kept in people’s mind. When reminded of the construction of the Great Wall, we will highly appreciate and admire the fruit of the workers’ hardworking rather than thinking of the decision made by Qin Shi Huang as the workers devoted too much for the construction and their contribution can not be weighed.

In sum, history is shaped by both key individuals and those nameless groups. It is the famous few that provide visions of the future and made（make） the major decisions. Their efforts are the highlight of the history, which can be replaced by none. However, the faceless（匿名的） groups are also a part of history, whose contribution, though with no wonder, is still born in mind by people nowadays.

Agnes写得很不错哦~很多角度我都没有想到，我都没发现要改的地方~~学习啦~~

jimmyjiangUID: 2776098

占

bestcampUID: 2640940

The author suggests that it is people that we should attribute the development of the world to though individuals are focused in history study nowadays .At the first glance, this point of view seems to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection tells me that I can not agree with it wholly for the following reasons.

People are the most valuable treasure in a country. It is a well-accepted point of view in our heart just like a common sense. An old saying goes that “Fire and water are good servants, but bad masters”. It is an excellent expression that shows the role of people is great in history.

Even if we accept the great role people take part in history. We still should not forget individuals. These individuals mainly mean heroes. As is asserted that history study pay more attention on individuals, I do not think it is partial, because on one hand historians can only study history starting from one aspect, that is individual, on the other hand, people is a too vague concept that can not give historians enough evidence to show how the world is changing. Why there are heroes? If we consider this question thoughtfully, we will find out that it is the trend of the times decides the appearance of certain individuals. It is everywhere in history that great people definitely emerge when it is troubled times. These men are not precious in quantity but in quality. They usually have great leadership or excellent judgment. The decisions they make can often decide the trend of everything. It is them that great effect of people is stimulated. It is them that people can just do their best to contribute.

To sum up, due to the above mentioned reasons, which sometimes correlate with each other to generate an integrate whole and thus become more convincing. We should not forget the role of certain individuals, which is the key to understand the history.

bestcampUID: 2640940

占

franceneUID: 2818958

Issue 48

It is no exaggeration to say that in everybody’s heart, there is a hero. This can be attributing to be one part of human nature. We can see many super heroes in move scenes, We have Superman, ,Spiderman, and the only savior to world “Neo” in the very famous movie “Matrix”. There are so many heroes in the fantasy world, then what about the real world?

As somebody says, movie scene is the other side of mirror to our normal life. The fact is just like this. There are many super heroes in the long history of human development too. These heroes use their fabulous ability and imagination to change our world with their own power. In the physical field, without Thomas Edison, we may still live in darkness. In biology, Alexander Fleming’s discovery of penicillin claim that humankind finally have their own weapon to the battle with the bacteria. In the art field, Picasso change the traditional art to a more abstract way which thus open the screen of the modern art. In politics, without Nelson Mandera, we cannot imagine the South African black people can own such a racial equality as today. These extraordinary people are the milestones of the history, they use their individual influence to make the world become better and better.

Meanwhile, There are still a group of people which behind these historical heroes cannot be overlooked. In the letter to a scientist friend, English famous physicist Isaac Newton says:” If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”  The word “giants” here was referring to the scientific predecessors which studied in Newton’s realm. Before discovering his famous three laws, Newton was very interested in describing the various motion and force in a mathematical way. At that time, another physicist Kepler noticed that the planet went around in an elliptical path, but not circularly, but Kepler was not able to find a mathematical method to explain it. By reading many books of Kepler, Newton began to think deeply about this problem. Finally he discovered first law of motion which is one part of the basic discipline to explain the planetary motion. Actually, Newton was not only referring to the giants in physical field, but also in some other realms which is related to. He used to read some books of Aristotle which He could get some small inspiration from . So, Can we just say that Newton himself finds the physical law? The answer can be yes, yet also can be no, we say that those key person is important for history, but, do not look down upon the power of the group behind those glamorous and successful heroes. Can you imagine Newton would be one of this foremost scientific intellects without those achievement that those old generation did?

In a word, in today’s information age, collaboration is more and more important for individual. One hero is not enough, we need more utilization of other’s profits to create new things. The power of individual is limited, but the force of groups is infinity. Some extraordinary person may trigger very important revolutions ,whereas without the efforts done by a group of people in or before their age, they cannot achieve such a success.


**************************************************************************

Self-revised 1st edition.


Thx to ITY AND POLO!
I changed my essay according to the mistakes u pointed in the revision
ur comments helped al lot, thx again!


It is no exaggeration to say that in everybody’s heart, there is a hero. We can see many super heroes in move scenes, We have Superman, ,Spiderman, and the only savior to world “Neo” in the very famous movie “Matrix”. Does any of us ever take a deep thinking about the origin of the heroism in the bottom of our hearts? Is it just one part of the human nature?

Back to the real world. With a look into the long history of human nature, We may find that the super heroes in our history book is no less than which is described in the fantasy world. In the physical field, without Thomas Edison, we may still live in darkness. In biology, Alexander Fleming’s discovery of penicillin claim that humankind finally have their own weapon to the battle with the bacteria. In the art field, Picasso change the traditional art to a more abstract way which thus open the screen of the modern art. In politics, without Nelson Mandera, we cannot imagine the South African black people can own such a racial equality as today. Are there so many great heroes in our living world, or Is it just an illusion which historical study gives us?

In the letter to a scientist friend, English famous physicist Isaac Newton says:” If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” The word “giants” here was referring to the scientific predecessors who studied in Newton’s realm. Thus, we can draw a conclusion that Newton’s success is not only count on himself. The truth is really it is. Before discovering his famous three laws, Newton was very interested in describing the various motion and force in a mathematical way. At that time, another physicist Kepler noticed that the planet went around in an elliptical path, but not a circularly, but Kepler was not able to find a mathematical method to explain it. By reading many books of Kepler, Newton began to think deeply about this problem. Finally he discovered first law of motion which is one part of the basic discipline to explain the planetary motion. Actually, Newton was not only referring to the giants in physical field, but also in some other realms which is related to. He used to read some books of Aristotle which He could get some small inspiration . So, Can we just say that Newton himself finds the physical law? But in most of the history book, it is written so.

Most studies of history take too much emphasis on the famous few but escapes from the whole truth which is really happened. Why? There might be two possible reasons. Firstly, an exaggerated story with a dramatic plot may attract more attention from the readers. Worship to the characters will make the history story more interesting and more suitable for primary readers. Besides, Contributing all the success of a historical event to one historical person will make it easier for the scholars of history to summarize. Sometimes they just condense the very importing part from complexity of the true history without mentioning that the groups of people left behind is also make a great influence for the developing of history.

In a word, even those successful people with fabulous ability and imagination to are the milestones of the history, we still cannot assert that only by those very famous few the revolutions of our world can be triggered. Thus, the study of history may need more emphasis on the groups of people, but not the only the famous few.