Issue26 历史遗迹和当代发展 大家看看怎么能简短些？

ally00lingUID: 178366

Issue26
Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such situations, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be served.

The author too broadly asserts that whenever the interests of protecting historic buildings and modern development are conflicting, the latter should be given the precedence over the former. However, I agree with the speaker only when the latter significantly out weigh the former. Otherwise, the preservation of the historic buildings should be always prior to modern constructions. Besides, the final decision of razing the historic buildings should be made only after circumspect investigations that prove the justification of the decision, and effective compensation must be carefully planned afterwards.

Generally speaking, preserving historic buildings—the precious heritage of human civilization, should always be given the precedence when its interests are against modern development, for the following reasons. First, it is historic building that plays an important role in teaching us where we are from, the spirits, experience, and achievements of our ancestors. It is the link between our forefather and us, as well as our future generations. Once cut, we are never able to reestablish it again. For example, when Taliban exploded several god temples in Afghanistan, the whole world is depressed for we forever lost this precious opportunity learn the mid east culture and religion. Secondly, protecting and reusing historic buildings make good financial sense. Every year, thousands of millions people from all over the world are devoting huge amount of money to visiting historic sites for their lasting values in culture, history, and art. For example, this so-called “History Tour” attracted satisfactory incomes for China last year, which made up over 60 percent of the total incomes of travel industry, and contributed greatly to China’s finance. And it only cost a minor part in preservation compared with the total incomes. On the contrary, demolition of the historic buildings may cost even more, for a large number of construction workers must be paid and it costs greatly to reconstruct and provide corresponding services like roads and sewers. What’s more, demolition of historic buildings costs us far beyond money. Lost are the brilliant, meaningful and lasting creations of talented ancient craftsmen; lost are memories, pride, honor and spirits of our forefather; lost are the opportunities for our future generations to appreciate and to learn where we are from and what we have achieved. All of these merits and values lying in historic buildings can never be substituted by any modern interests.

However, when the compelling interests of modern development significantly outweigh that of historic buildings, for instance, when the existence of a historic building threatens a community’s survival, or even hampers a nation’s vital development, after circumspect investigation that can demonstrate the rationalization of demolition of these historic buildings, modern development should be given the precedence. For example, the Three Gorges Project of Yangtze River plays a vital role in China’s future economic development, and the well being of Chinese people, for it serves to minimize the disasters of Yangtze River, and facilitate the transportation and power supply for the vast area of southern China. However, this project is to be accomplished at the price of several historic buildings, including Zhangfei Temple, which was built thousands of years ago in honor of a great patriotic figure of ancient China. Great effort were made to avoid such demolition, but in vain. Therefore, Chinese planners, after prudent investigations which reveals that the preservation of these historic sites will seriously hamper the realization of the whole project, finally decided to continue the project at the lost of these historic sites. Though this decision is still controversial, it is the only way out to secure the future development of China so far.

Moreover, it is equally necessary for the planners to work out compensations for the lost of the historic buildings. Sacrificing this heritage for modern development does not mean an end, but a beginning, because we can not afford the lost of them and their profound values, but we can compensate as much as possible with the help of modern technology. Besides, it is our obligation to teach our future generations how to value the heritage passed down from our forefather while carrying on modern development. The compensating of the Three Gorges Project is also a good example here. All of the historic buildings including Zhangfei Temple were removed to other sites at upper reaches of Yangtze River, and reconstructed. In the introductions of these newly rebuilt historic buildings, the original locations and the reason why they are removed are told in detail for the future visitors. Thought the lost can not be made up completely, we are able to give our future generations the opportunity to cherish and honor these historic buildings again, and let them understand our effort in reconciling the conflicting interests between preservation of historic heritage and the modern development.

In sum, I agree with the speaker’s assertion only when modern needs significantly outweigh the interests of protecting the historic building; otherwise, it is the historic buildings that should always be given the precedence when the interests of them conflict. Furthermore, since we have no rights to deprive of the opportunity from our future generations to appreciate the brilliant heritage passed down from our ancestors, and we bear responsibility to teach them how to deal with the conflicting interests between modern and history through our effort, our decisions of continuing with modern development at the price of historic buildings should be made only after careful investigations to prove the validation, and proper compensating measures must be taken afterwards.

指向大海UID: 158737

The author too broadly asserts that whenever the interests of protecting historic buildings and modern development are conflicting, the latter should be given the precedence over the former. However, I agree with the speaker only when the latter significantly out weigh the former. Otherwise, the preservation of the historic buildings should be always prior to modern constructions. Besides, the final decision of razing the historic buildings should be made only after circumspect investigations that prove the justification of the decision, and effective compensation must be carefully planned afterwards.

Generally speaking, preserving historic buildings—the precious heritage of human civilization, should always be given the precedence when its interests are against modern development, for the following reasons. First, it is historic building[buildings] that plays[play] an important role in teaching us where we are from[后面都是并列连词,放这很别扭不如改为the origin of human], the spirits, experience, and achievements of our ancestors. It is the link between our forefather and us, as well as our future generations. Once cut[been cut], we are never able to reestablish it again. For example, when Taliban exploded several god temples in Afghanistan, the whole world is depressed for we forever lost this precious opportunity learn the mid east culture and religion. Secondly, protecting and reusing historic buildings make good financial sense. Every year, thousands of millions[加个of] people from all over the world are devoting huge amount of money to [devote to是献身致力于的意思,虽然金山里面有你这里的意思,但偶还是觉得spend好]visiting historic sites for their lasting values in culture, history, and art. For example, this so-called “History Tour” attracted satisfactory incomes for China last year, which made up over 60 percent of the total incomes of travel industry, and contributed greatly to China’s finance. And it only cost a minor part in preservation compared with the total incomes. On the contrary, demolition of the historic buildings may cost even more, for a large number of construction workers must be paid and it costs greatly to reconstruct and provide corresponding services like roads and sewers. What’s more, demolition of historic buildings costs us far beyond money. Lost are the brilliant, meaningful and lasting creations of talented ancient craftsmen; lost are memories, pride, honor and spirits of our forefather; lost are the opportunities for our future generations to appreciate and to learn where we are from and what we have achieved. [也许你自己觉得这里的排比用的好,但我觉得用not only, but also就可以了]All of these merits and values lying in historic buildings [which]can never be substituted by any modern interests.[这一段不错,似乎应该比下一段分量重,还可以挖掘,就只有精神财富和物质财富两点么?]

However, when the compelling interests of modern development significantly outweigh that of historic buildings, for instance, when the existence of a historic building threatens a community’s survival, or even hampers a nation’s vital development, after circumspect investigation that can demonstrate the rationalization of demolition of these historic buildings, modern development should be given the precedence. For example, the Three Gorges Project of Yangtze River plays a vital role in China’s future economic development, and the well being of Chinese people, for it serves to minimize the disasters of Yangtze River, and facilitate the transportation and power supply for the vast area of southern China. However, this project is to be accomplished at the price of several historic buildings, including Zhangfei Temple, which was built thousands of years ago in honor of a great patriotic figure of ancient China. Great effort[efforts] were made to avoid such demolition, but in vain. Therefore, Chinese planners, after prudent investigations which reveals[reveal] that the preservation of these historic sites will seriously hamper the realization of the whole project, finally decided to continue the project at the lost of these historic sites. Though this decision is still controversial, it is the only way out to secure the future development of China so far.

Moreover, it is equally necessary for the planners to work out compensations for the lost of the historic buildings. Sacrificing this heritage for modern development does not mean an end, but a beginning, because we can not afford the lost of them and their profound values, but we can compensate as much as possible with the help of modern technology. Besides, it is our obligation to teach our future generations how to value the heritage passed down from our forefather while carrying on modern development. The compensating of the Three Gorges Project is also a good example here. All of the historic buildings including Zhangfei Temple were removed to other sites at upper reaches of Yangtze River, and reconstructed. In the introductions of these newly rebuilt historic buildings, the original locations and the reason why they are removed are told in detail for the future visitors. Thought the lost can not be made up completely, we are able to give our future generations the opportunity to cherish and honor these historic buildings again, and let them understand our effort in reconciling the conflicting interests between preservation of historic heritage and the modern development. [阻碍是不是可以用其他的词替换?impede, hinder. 三峡的例子很好,但觉得可以精简老外知道这个的,你多论证些.]

In sum, I agree with the speaker’s assertion only when modern needs significantly outweigh the interests of protecting the historic building; otherwise, it is the historic buildings that should always be given the precedence when the interests of them conflict. Furthermore, since we have no rights to deprive of the opportunity from our future generations[offspring是不是更好] to appreciate the brilliant heritage passed down from our ancestors, and we bear [the]responsibility to teach them how to deal with the conflicting interests between modern and history through our effort, our decisions of continuing with modern development at the price of historic buildings should be made only after careful investigations to prove the validation, and proper compensating measures must be taken afterwards.
[你有没有先用word把语法错误纠正?]

fengboallanUID: 157405

ally00ling:
呵呵，看了我吓一跳啊。好长的文章啊，真的。
给点建议吧，单纯的简洁和去掉允长的句子是不可取的，因为是在时间充沛的情况下，那样怎么改都行。所以不能这样。
这篇文章，估计不是限时完成的。你可以考虑，把自己置身限时的状态下，觉得当时哪句话能说出来，那句话说不出来。这时候再写或者修改就能够短了/因为时间是有限的。呵呵
尝试一下

haiyaUID: 187989

不好意思，刚刚想帮你改。爸爸催我睡觉了。这几天我身体不太好。
我明天中午再帮你看看吧。：）

ally00lingUID: 178366

恩，谢谢 指向大海 和fengboallan的建议，

我觉得我有个问题就是把我不清主次，我有三个意思：一般来讲应保留历史遗迹，特殊情况应差拆除，补救措施亦必要，想把问题都照顾到就扯了这么多，想请教大家到底重点应放在哪里？？都讲清楚显然时间不够。。。

haiya,注意身体！：）