2. 职称英语
  3. The City In one sense, we can trace all the probl

The City In one sense, we can trace all the probl

游客2023-07-29  9
问题                           The City
    In one sense, we can trace all the problems of the American city back to a single starting point: we Americans don’t like our cities very much.
    That is, on file face of it, absurd (荒谬的). After all, more than three-fourths of us now live in cities, and more are flocking to them every year. We are told that the problems of our cities are receiving more attention in Washington, and scholarship has discovered a whole new field in urban studies.
    I don’t pretend to be a scholar on the history of the city in American life. But my thirteen years in public office, first as an officer of the U.S. Department of Justice, then as Congressman, and now as Mayor of the biggest city in America, have taught me all too well the fact that a strong anti-urban attitude runs consistently through the mainstream of American thinking. Much of the drive behind the settlement of America was in reaction to the conditions in European industrial centers -- and much of the theory supporting the basis of freedom in America was linked directly to the availability of land and the perfectibility of man outside the corrupt influences of the city.
What has this to do with the predicament of the modem city? I think it has much to do with it. The fact is that the United States, particularly the federal government, which has historically established our national priorities, has simply never thought that the American city was "worthy" of improvement -- at least not to the extent of expending any basic resources on it.
    Antipathy (反感) to the city predates the American experience. When industrialization drove the European working man into the major cities of the continent, books and pamphlets appeared attacking the city as a source of crime, corruption, filth, disease, vice, licentiousness (放荡), subversion, and high prices. The theme of some of the earliest English novels -- Moll Flander for example -- is that of the innocent country youth coming to the big city and being subjected to all forms of horror until justice -- and a return to the pastoral life -- follow.
    The proper opinion of Europe seemed to support the Frenchman who wrote: "In the country, a man’s mind is free and easy; but in the city, the persons of friends and acquaintances, one’s own and other people’s business, foolish quarrels, ceremonies, visits, impertinent discourses, and a thousand other diversions steal away the greatest part of our time and leave no leisure for better and necessary employment. Great towns are but a large sort of prison to the soul, like cages to birds or pounds to beasts."
    This was not, of course, the only opinion on city life. Others maintained that the city was "the fireplace of civilization, whence light and heat radiated out into the cold dark world." And William Penn planned Philadelphia as the "holy city," carefully laid out so that each house would have the appearance of a country cottage m avoid the density and overcrowding that so characterized European cities.
    Without question, however, the first major thinker to express a clear antipathy to the urban way of life was Thomas Jefferson. For Jefferson, the political despotism (专制制度) of Europe and economic despotism of great concentrations of wealth, on the one hand, and poverty on the other, were symbolized by the cities of London and Paris, which he visited frequently during his years as a diplomatic representative of the new nation. In the new world, with its opportunities for widespread landholding, there was the chance for a flowering of authentic freedom, with each citizen, free from economic dependence, both able and eager to participate in charting the course of his own future. America, in a real sense, was an escape from all the injustice that had flourished in Europe -- injustice that was characterized by the big city.
    This Jeffersonian theme was to remain an integral part of the American tradition. Throughout the nineteenth century, as the explorations of America pushed farther outward, the new settlers sounded most like each other in their common celebration of freedom from city chains.
    The point is that all this opinion goes beyond ill feelings; it suggests a strong national sense that encouragement and development of the city was to be in no sense a national priority -- that our manifest destiny lay in the untouched lands to the west, in constant movement westward, and in maximum dispersion of land to as many people as possible.
    With the coming of rapid industrialization, all the results of investigations into city poverty and despair that we think of as recent findings were being reported -- and each report served to confirm the beliefs of the Founding Fathers that the city was no place for a respectable American.
    Is this all relevant only to past attitudes and past legislative history? I don’t think so. The fact is that until today, this same basic belief-- that our cities ought to be left to fend for themselves -- is still a powerful element in our national tradition.
    Consider more modem history. The most important housing act in the last twenty-five years was not the law that provided for public housing; it was the law that permitted the Federal Housing Administration to grant subsidized low-interest mortgages (按揭贷款) to Americans who want to purchase homes. More than anything else, this has made the suburban dream a reality. It has brought the vision of grass and trees and a place for the kids to play within the reach of millions of working Americans, and the consequences be damned. The impact of such legislation on the cities was not even considered -- nor was the concept of making subsidized money available for neighborhood renovation in the city so that it might compete with the suburbs. Instead, in little more than a decade, 800 000 middle income New Yorkers fled the city for the suburbs and were replaced by largely unskilled workers who in many instances represented a further cost rather than an economic asset.
    And it was not a hundred years ago but two years ago that a suggested law giving a small amount of federal money for rat control was literally laughed off the floor of the House of Representatives amid much joking about discrimination against country rats in favor of city rats.
    What happened, I think, was not the direct result of a "the city is evil and therefore we will not help it" concept. It was more indirect, more subtle, the result of the kind of thinking that enabled us to spend billions of dollars in subsidies to preserve the family farm while doing nothing about an effective pro- gram for jobs in the city; to create government agencies concerned with the interests of agriculture, veterans, small business, labor, commerce, and the American Indian, but to create no Department of Urban Development until 1965; to so restrict money that meaningful federal aid is still not possible.
    In other words, the world of urban America as a dark and desolate place undeserving of support or help has become fixed in the American consciousness. And we are paying for that attitude in our cities today. [br] It seems that the federal government has never paid attention to the city improvement.
选项 A、Y
B、N
C、NG
答案 A
解析 此句与第四段第三句“The fact is that the United States，particularly the federal government，which has historically established our national priorities, has simply never thought that the American city was "worthy" of improvement—at least not to the extent of expending any basic resources on it.”的意思相同。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/2880813.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)