2. 职称英语
  3. The sixties have been misunderstood. It was not a radical decade, as the ter

The sixties have been misunderstood. It was not a radical decade, as the ter

游客2025-04-20  35
问题     The sixties have been misunderstood. It was not a radical decade, as the term radical is commonly used in connection with those years. It was not a decade of the left ascendant. Rampant, perhaps but not ascendant. Rather, the decade was radicalizing, which, subsequent decades have shown, is different. Politically, the sixties invigorated the right more than the left. But of course politics is not everything. In fact, three decades down the road, the nation’s political discourse may be driven by conservatives, but they, although by many measures triumphant, seem aggrieved because politics seems peripheral to, and largely impotent against, cultural forces and institutions permeated with what conservatives consider the sixties sensibilities.
    Treating a decade as a discrete entity obviously makes the assumption that history during that decade had an obliging tidiness, opening with a decisive and tone-setting episode and closing with a suitably climatic event. History rarely accommodates that assumption. Such a treatment of a decade also makes the equally dubious assumption that the decade in question had a clearly dominant tone or profile. So the 1920s was the decade of jazz, flappers, the birth of the sports celebrity(Babe Ruth, Red Orange, Jack Dempsey), the Lost Generation, Sacco and Vanzetti and.. .Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover.
    Let us stipulate this, then: A decade, even one as intensely felt at the time and as hotly debated afterward as the sixties was and is, can come to seem, when recollected in tranquility, quite unlike the decade as it was felt at the time, and unlike the decade as it is portrayed by people with an emotional or political investment in portraying it a particular way.
    It is arguable that we should think of the sixties as beginning in November 1963 and ending in October 1973. That is, the years we connect with the tumultuousness associated with the phrase "the sixties’ began with the assassination of a president and ended with the Yom Kippur War and the energy crisis". The assassination shattered(or at least many people say it did)the nation’s sunny postwar disposition; it supposedly "ended American innocence". It is unclear how innocent was his nation that had been made possible by Puritans, had been founded by such innocents as Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and James Madison had been born in the bloodshed of what actually was not only the American Revolution but also America’s first civil war, had been preserved by the worst civil war the world had until then seen...you get the picture. The sixties as a decade of "lost innocence"? The 1973 oil embargo, which produced a sense of national vulnerability and pervasive limits, did seem to bring down a curtain on something. But on what? [br] What does the passage mainly discuss?
选项 A、A radical period in American history.
B、Different events in the sixties.
C、The true picture of the sixties.
D、Real radicals in the sixties.
答案 C
解析 主旨题。纵观全文可知，第一句作者讲到人们对60年代的错误看法，然后从不同方面论述了关于60年代的事情，最后推翻最初提出的观点。所以正确答案是C选项。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/4045438.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)