issue26 回拍

xbcperceptionUID: 2309800

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 642          TIME:           DATE: 2007-7-10 17:49:34

As our society is progressing at an unprecedented pace, we are bombarded with slogans such as modernization, urbanization, some people allege that we should abandon all the traditional buildings without concerning their values. I concede that in order to maintain the pace of our society's progressing speed, we need to build up modern architectures in our country, but it is also urgent to preserve some historical architectures which provide great values to us.

Admittedly, not all the traditional buildings are of great importance to us, on certain conditions some of them needed to be torn down and be replaced by the modern ones. Except a certain number of magnificent historical buildings, lots of them are just average ones and of little value. Take the ordinary houses, which our precedents lived in through their lives, for example, these buildings, which usually looks similar with each other, can just remind us the living conditions of our ancestor. It is not necessary to preserve all of these buildings, for just one of them is enough to serve the function as portraying a picture of our ancestor' living places.   The rest of these buildings should be torn down and be substituted by modern ones, since these buildings are not compatible to present living styles and we surely will not used to live in these buildings any more. Therefore, concerning the situations mentioned above, we should set up brand new buildings to replace in the useless old ones.

However, when there are conflicts, sometimes we should preserve historical buildings rather than raze them and set up new ones. A few significant historical architectures not just represent the past of our human beings’ history, they have lots of other values to our society. An illustrate example is the well known architecture pyramid in Egypt, the pyramid not only write down some historical events in the progressing history of humans, they also remind us the great achievement made by the Egyptian and the architects can learn numerous knowledge from it, since it is created so perfectly and seems a miracle considering they can use rarely any advanced techniques. These historical architectures should be saved no matter on what circumstance, because they mean so much to our society that the loss of them definitely would be a tremendous disaster for us and the world as a whole. So we should make every effort to preserve some meaningful traditional architectures.

Moreover, when we are in dilemma, there are some compromising ways to solve this problem beside "yes" or "no" the two options. There always exist other answers toward this question instead of yes and no. Sometimes we could combine "yes" with "no" and then forming additional option. When we considering raze an old building and list the reasons such as it is not equipped with modern facility and it is not as stable, attractive as it used to be. We can provide another method, which focus on do some repair and supply some advanced facilities to this building, rather than razing it. It will be a beneficial consequence and there already are successful examples proved its possibilities in our everyday lives-we can see lots of attractive historical building stand up in our modern society. Instead of shadowing the modernization our society achieved, they give us a feeling of classical beauty and strengthen the modernization of our society, for they show us all the advanced techniques we can use at present. Thus, we can resolve the conflicts using a moderate approach and this approach is usually the best way to solve this problem.

In sum, there are always contradicting views toward tradition and modernization, we should not make our decisions too rush concerning this complex issue, and we do not always have to choose one then forgo the other, sometimes they can coexist harmony with each other.



[ 本帖最后由 xbcperception 于 2007-7-11 10:52 编辑 ]

lintennisUID: 2219747

As our society is progressing at an unprecedented pace, we are bombarded with slogans such as modernization, urbanization, some people allege that we should abandon all the traditional buildings without concerning their values (What is this sentence bases on? The topic merely tells us that we should give the precedence to the traditional buildings, but not to abandon all). I concede that in order to maintain the pace of our society's progressing speed :confused: , we need to build up modern architectures in our country, but it is also urgent to preserve some historical architectures which provide great values to us.

Admittedly, not all the traditional buildings are of great importance to us, on certain conditions some of them needed to be torn down and be replaced by the modern ones. Except a certain number of magnificent historical buildings, lots of them are just average ones and of little value. Take the ordinary houses, which our precedents lived in through their lives, for example, these buildings, which usually looks similar with each other, can just remind us the living conditions of our ancestor. It is not necessary to preserve all of these buildings, for just one of them is enough to serve the function as portraying a picture of our ancestor' living places.   The rest of these buildings should be torn down and be substituted by modern ones, since these buildings are not compatible to present living styles and we surely will not used to live in these buildings any more. Therefore, concerning (considering) the situations mentioned above, we should set up brand new buildings to replace in the useless old ones.

However, when there are conflicts, sometimes we should preserve historical buildings rather than raze them and set up new ones. A few significant historical architectures not just represent the past of our human beings’ history, they have lots of other values to our society. An illustrate example is the well known architecture pyramid in Egypt (Is the preservation of pyramid urgent according to your viewpoint?), the pyramid not only write down some historical events in the progressing history of humans, they also remind us the great achievement made by the Egyptian and the architects can learn numerous knowledge from it, since it is created so perfectly and seems a miracle considering they can use rarely any advanced techniques. These historical architectures should be saved no matter on what circumstance, because they mean so much to our society that the loss of them definitely would be a tremendous disaster for us and the world as a whole. So we should make every effort to preserve some meaningful traditional architectures.

Moreover, when we are in dilemma, there are some compromising ways to solve this problem beside "yes" or "no" the two options. There always exist other answers toward this question instead of yes and no. Sometimes we could combine "yes" with "no" and then forming additional option. (So awkward) When we considering raze an old building and list the reasons such as it is not equipped with modern facility and it is not as stable, attractive as it used to be. We can provide another method, which focus on do some repair and supply some advanced facilities to this building, rather than razing it. It will be a beneficial consequence and there already are successful examples proved its possibilities in our everyday lives-we can see lots of attractive historical building stand up in our modern society. Instead of shadowing the modernization our society achieved, they give us a feeling of classical beauty and strengthen the modernization of our society, for they show us all the advanced techniques we can use at present. Thus, we can resolve the conflicts using a moderate approach and this approach is usually the best way to solve this problem.

In sum, there are always contradicting views toward tradition and modernization, we should not make our decisions too rush concerning this complex issue, and we do not always have to choose one then forgo the other, sometimes they can coexist harmony with each other.


FYI: The time devoted to construct the logic of article would be much more useful.

在看了无数范文和习作后，个人心目中最理想化的一段应该是这样子的：1对于issue先提出中心句-当前段落的分论点,对argument是你这段要批判 的错误；2然后issue对着那个中心句议论一番，说为什么我会这么想，对argument就是“作者自以为。。。，实际上出现了。。。错误“，并议论错 误使其在理；3最后举个材料并说出其同前面议论的联系，让大家看到：看，我这并不是空投议论，还有现实事物支撑着呢；如果是argument的话就是后果 和小评论，也就是诸如“如果没有发现的话，很有可能会出现。。。。因此arguer这个论证完全没有说服力，其散漫的态度必将受到人民的唾骂~~“之类。 如此1由23同时撑着同时3还撑着2，整个架构十分牢固而且清晰；大家拿张图纸画一下就明白了~~ 以上当中，最重要的一点就是，这段中的所有东西都只能围绕着1中心句转，而不是其他的，不然你的这段论证也就白证明了，就像后面举得那个例子一样。 还有就是我们的1中心句，也就是首句一定要提炼，并且同后面的论证有清晰的分割线。让老师明白什么是论证什么是中心句，千万不要混在一起。 对于论证，你可以介绍一些概念，比如说最下面引用的那个例子；然后进行拓展，并自圆其说，这样子能够凑得出话来；对于例子，后面的论述是点睛之笔，千万别长，不然会显得很让人烦。 我在这里引用一位板油习作中的一段，比较经典，大家可以看看当中的问题： On the other hand, the artists' works can also reveal some aspects of society which people may do not realize before and help people understand the society more thoroughly, which is another one of most typical characters of lasting value. To this point, Mark Twain’s works serve an apt example to illustrate this point. His insightful works revealed various things including the hard life of lower-class people, the endeavor of explorers, the curiosity of children, and the darkness of people in charge. Therefore, people could learned lots of previously unknown facts from his works, and hence understand the society more comprehensively. 1。结构不好，整体围绕着后面的例子转。按照前面的123理论，可以看到23次序倒过来了，并把2指向了3而不是1；这样子整个架构相比我前面说的就不是很稳了，而且还混乱，至少我到现在还没画出其中123关系图是什么样的。虽然文采很不错，不过分数并不会高的。 2。首句太长，大家可以看到，六行文字里面首句占了两行；更可恶的就是还是那种特别啰嗦的，至少逗号后面的可以完全去掉。 下面的是这篇作文的下一段，感觉就好很多，大家看看是不是这样呢? However, I have to point out that, the critics who judge and comment on arts are the indispensable part that people should never neglect. The critic is vital to both artists and ordinary people. They can help people correctly and comprehensively understand the information of arts; they can assist artists clearly illustrate their beliefs; they also can serve as a guide to direct artists’ way to success. For supporting examples, one only needs to check Monet's famous painting "Impression: Sunrise". Were there no critics comment on this work, it would be doomed to remain unknown to public due to its obscurity. Again, great painter Van Gogh's paintings did not gain the acceptance of public until his suicide. Needless to say, it is the critics' contribution after nearly half a century to bring them back to life. From this aspect, the connection role between people and artists critics play in formulating lasting values is too important to be neglected. 当然咯，这一段他对于例子还是话太多而对分论点的论证相对较少，不过已经清晰很多了。 大家同时还可以参照一下各类范文，看看他们的论证是怎么写的，以加深对本文内容的理解~~~~可以的话再实例模仿一下为妙~From: http://bbs.taisha.org/thread-634578-1-1.html

[ 本帖最后由 lintennis 于 2007-7-11 22:33 编辑 ]