Issue48【六人行7.27】by CrazyJoO

crazyjooUID: 2805124

TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
WORDS: 548
TIME: 00:45:00
DATE: 2000-7-27 18:23:53


Admittedly, the study of history pays too much attention to those elites whose great achievement change the trends of history. In most people's eyes, history just is consisted of celebrities. Chairman Mao, Mahatma Gandhi, Joan of Art immediately come to our mind when we mention the history of China, India and France. However, it is populace involved in those sensations determine the sketch of world

To begin with, when it comes to the area of sciences, few people will deny that it is some extremely brilliant people who change the history by his/her own effort.Few people would be inspired by the movement of the cover of kettle and invented a incredible machine. However, Watt, with his steam machine tremendously accelerated the pace of human development.As a result, the history ran much faster than before and finally approach to the era of industrialization. Besides, few people can be so brave and clever enough to overturn the Three Laws of Motion, by Isaac Newton, who set the foundation of modern physics. It is Albert Einstein, with his Relativity Theory, that turned a new page of the development of sciences. In this respect, elites like Watt and Einstein change the trends of history greatly without any help from others.

Forgoing those two provisos, I fundamentally agree that most significant event and trends in history were made by groups of people rather than the famous few. History is macroscopic and complex. And significant event and trends in history are not like a breakthrough in the field of technology. Although Individual's effort is not sufficient to make significant events possible in history, it is not uncommon to see that many famous revolutions are led by few elites due to their priceless person characteristic. However, the main roles in such events are groups of participants who were usually forgotten by the history. One example aptly illustrates this point involved Xing Hai Revolution in China, which is aimed at overturning the Qing Dynasty. China had been dominated by feudalism for over two thousand years. Land was own by few tycoons and most common people worked for them day and night with little pay. Under the leadership of Sun Yat-sen, Chinese people took their harrows and learnt to use guns to which they were unfamiliar to fight against the army of Qing Dynasty. Wars were cruel considering the army of Qing Dynasty is comprised of professional and seasoned soldiers. At last, the revolution finally approached to its ultimate goal, that is to say, to overturn the Qing Dynasty and annihilate the feudalism which had enslaved Chinese people for thousands of years. Without the sacrifice of the martyrs who adhere to Sun Yat-sen, the revolution cannot possible succeed. Had those farmers who were oppressed by feudalism did not stood up and began to express their anger; China might still be dominated by feudalism and left far behind with other modern countries.

To sum up, the speaker is fundamentally correct. The scholar of history should record more common people involved in significant trends in history. Not only because their crucial influence and decisive role as a whole, but also the common ground between them and us. In this light, we can learn from them and be inspired the idea that, we are also involved in the trends in current history. Thus, we common people can also contribute greatly to our society like those famous few.

限时。。本来想写五段的。就是说过份关注历史中的个人不好。。结果没时间只好撇结尾了。。

odiehereUID: 2502172

Admittedly, the study of history pays too much attention to those elites whose great achievement change[单复数] the trends of history. In most people's eyes, history just is consisted of celebrities. Chairman Mao, Mahatma Gandhi, Joan of Art immediately come to our mind when we mention the history of China, India and France. However, it is populace involved in those sensations [that] determine the sketch of world 【history】

To begin with, when it comes to the area of sciences, few people will deny that it is some extremely brilliant people who change the history by his/her own effort.Few people would be inspired by the movement of the cover of kettle and invented a[n] incredible machine. However, Watt, with his steam machine[,] tremendously accelerated the pace of human development.As a result, the history ran much faster than before and finally approach to the era of industrialization. Besides, few people can be so brave and clever enough to overturn the Three Laws of Motion, by Isaac Newton, who set the foundation of modern physics. It is Albert Einstein, with his Relativity Theory, that turned a new page of the development of sciences. In this respect, elites like Watt and Einstein change the trends of history greatly without any help from others. [这一段的论证语气可以不用那么绝对，因为和下一段之间冲突的。也许你可以分类，比如说scientific breakthroughs may be achieved based on the talents of individual researcher, but historical social events will not happen without the accumulativen effots of large groups of ordinary citizens. ]

Forgoing those two[有两个？] provisos, I fundamentally agree that most significant event and trends in history were made by groups of people rather than the famous few. History is macroscopic and complex. And significant event and trends in history are not like a breakthrough in the field of technology[history 和technology 并不对立，还有the history of science 的嘛~]. Although Individual's effort is not sufficient to make significant events possible in history, it is not uncommon to see that many famous revolutions are led by few elites due to their priceless person[al] characteristic. However, the main roles[role-players]in such events are groups of participants who were usually forgotten by the history. One example aptly illustrates this point involved Xing Hai [好像应该说成是the 1911 Revolution]Revolution in China, which is[was] aimed at overturning the Qing Dynasty. China had been dominated by feudalism for over two thousand years. Land was own by few tycoons and most common people worked for them day and night with little pay. Under the leadership of Sun Yat-sen, Chinese people took their harrows and learnt to use guns to which they were unfamiliar to fight against the army of Qing Dynasty. Wars were cruel considering the army of Qing Dynasty is comprised of professional and seasoned soldiers. At last, the revolution finally approached to its ultimate goal, that is to say, to overturn the Qing Dynasty and annihilate the feudalism which had enslaved Chinese people for thousands of years. Without the sacrifice of the martyrs who adhere to Sun Yat-sen, the revolution cannot possible succeed. Had those farmers who were oppressed by feudalism did not stood up and began to express their anger; China might still be dominated by feudalism and left far behind with other modern countries. [辛亥革命的例证有些冗长，细节描述太多了吧；在表述上好像反而更像是支持hero作用大。我觉得这个例子可以用，但是可能要把语言修改一下，更加和本段的论点。可能你本来想在第五段讲一个这样的例子?]

To sum up, the speaker is fundamentally correct. The scholar of history should record more common people involved in significant trends in history. Not only because their crucial influence and decisive role as a whole, but also the common ground between them and us. In this light, we can learn from them and be inspired [by] the idea that, we are also involved in the trends in current history. Thus, we common people can also contribute greatly to our society like those famous few.
[如果要更加全面的一个总结的话是不是也最好把第二段的论点提一下咯~ 挺好的文章，继续修改到更好吧~]

crazyjooUID: 2805124

I fundamentally agree with the speaker's claim. Just consider those historic theme television program, text book of history used by students, history seems to be only comprised of one celebrity after another celebrity. In my point of view, the study of history should place emphasis on those groups of people involved in significant historic events. The direction of history is largely determined by those forgotten people and underestimating their value will inevitably be counterproductive to our study of history.

Admittedly, few one would deny that those famous few have tremendous impace on history. Consider those social reformers such as Joan of Arc, Mathamat Gandhi and so forth. It look like that it is mere the power of these heroes and heroines that change the destiny of their motherlands. Inspired by the godspels, Joan of Arc, a teenager, encouraged the torpid citizenry, led the French army and finally repulsed the invadors. Likewise, Mathamat Gandhi with his great intelligence, mercy and tolerance, incited the No Violence Resistance and free India at last. It seems like that withou these Joan or Arc and Gandhi, residents in France and India can do nothing but to surrender to enemy since few people can have such eminent leadership and valuable characters as theirs. Understandably, the famous people such as Joan of Arc, Gandhi, Churchill, Lincoin appears to the symbol the era they lived.

However, we should not forget those groups of people behind the famous few. When discussing about the Second War World, people tend to mention the feats, the brilliant strategies of Churchill. In fact, individuals are not sufficient to change the history no matter how distinguished they are. The victories of the Second War World are soldiers as well as populace who fighted against the Nazi bravely. It is the sacrifice of G.I.s that brought peace to the earth of the world. They were the people who change the history. They travled far away from their home to save democracy and freedom, to defeat the tyrannt and save oppressed people. They were as great as their leader--Churchill who engaged in securing the security of country, since they were willing to die for the victory of justice and the safety of citizenry.

Moreover, placing too much emphasis on the famous few will be counterproductive to our study of history. The mammoth achievement the famous few accomplished and the far-reaching decision they made serves to enlarge the gap between them and we common people, that is to say, such over emphasis on celebrities will make them unapproachable and hence discouarges every people who want to be as successful as those famous people.  The study of history largely distribute the victory of Second World War to those famous leader such as Churchill. Understandably, people will learn less from history since they may think that Churchill is a unqiue one and common people cannot learn much from his biography. To the contrary, if the study of history begin to place more weight on the ordinary people who prompt the development of history, people will come to get more knowledge and inspriations from history because they can review the value of ordinary people in a new perspective. Therefore, they will be inspired greatly and ask themselves following questions: Can I also be the one prompt the history?

As shown above, the study of history should not focus on the famous few. The importance of the groups of people behind those sensations is inegliable. We learn from their stories and we are encouraged by them.