题目内容
B型题 心气大伤，精神散乱可见（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
"Wanna buy a body?" That was the opening line of more than a few phone calls I got from self-employed photographers when I was a photo editor at U.S. News. Like many in the mainstream press, I wanted to separate the world of photographers into "them", who trade in pictures of bodies or run after famous people like Princess Diana, and "us", the serious news people. But after 16 years in that role, I came to wonder whether the two worlds were easily distinguishable. Working in the reputable world of journalism, I told photographers to cover other people's difficult life situations. I justified marching into moments of sadness, under the appearance of the reader's right to know. I worked with professionals talking their way into situations or shooting from behind police lines. And I wasn't alone. In any American town, after a car crash or some other horrible incident when ordinary people are hurt or killed, you rarely see photographers pushing past rescue workers to take photos of the blood and injuries. But you are likely to see local newspaper and television photographers on the scene –and fast… How can we justify doing this? Journalists are taught to separate, doing the job from worrying about the consequences of publishing what they record. Repeatedly, they are reminded of a news-business saying: Leave your conscience in the office, A victim may lie bleeding, unconscious, or dead. Your job is to record the image (图象). You're a photographer, not an emergency medical worker. You put away your feelings and document the scene. But catastrophic events often bring out the worst in photographers and photo editors. In the first minutes and hours after a disaster occurs, photo agencies buy pictures. They rush to obtain the rights to be the only one to own these shocking images and death is usually the subject.Often, an agency buys a picture from a local newspaper or an amateur photographer and puts it up for bid by major magazines. The most sought-after special pictures command tens of thousands of dollars through bidding contests. I worked on all those stories and many like them. When they happen, you move quickly: buying, dealing, trying to beat the agencies to the pictures. Now, many people believe journalists are the hypocrites(伪君子)who need to be brought down, and it's our pictures that most anger others. Readers may not believe, as we do, that there is a distinction between clear-minded "us" and mean-spirited "them". In too many cases, by our choices of images as well as how we get them, we prove our readers right. Many people say that they are annoyed by the U.S. News pictures.（）
The Storyteller 1.Steven Spielberg has always had one goal: to tell as many great stories to as many people as will listen.And that’s what he has always been about.The son of a computer scientist and a pianist, Spielberg spent his early childhood in New Jersey and, later, Arizona.From the very beginning, his fertile imagination filled his young mind with images that would later inspire his filmmaking. 2.Even decades later, Spielberg says he has clear memories of his earliest years, which are the origins of some of his biggest hits.He believes that E.T.is the result of the difficult years leading up to his parent’s 1966 divorce, “It is really about a young boy who was in search of some stability in his life.”“He was scared of just about everything,” recalls his mother, Leah Adler.“When trees brushed against the house, he would head into my bed.And that’s just the kind of scary stuff he would put in films like Poltergeist.”3.Spielberg was 11 when he first got his hands on his dad’s movie camera and began shooting short flicks about flying saucers and World War ΙΙ battles.Spielberg’s talent for scary storytelling enabled him to make friends.On Boy Scout camping trips, when night fell, Spielberg became the center of attention.“Steven would start telling his ghost stories,” says Richard Y.Hoffman Jr., leader of Troop 294, “and everyone would suddenly get quiet so that they could all hear it.”4. Spielberg moved to California with his father and went to high school there, but his grades were so bad that he barely graduated.Both UCLA and USC film schools rejected him, so he entered California State University at Long Beach because it was close to Hollywood.Spielberg was determined to make movies, and he managed to get an unpaid, non-credit internship(实习)in Hollywood.Soon he was given a contract, and he dropped out of college.He never looked back.5. Now, many years later, Spielberg is still telling stories with as much passion as the kid in the tent.Ask him where he gets his ideas, Spielberg shrugs.“The process for me is mostly intuitive (凭直觉的),” he says.“There are films that I feel I need to make, for a variety of reasons, for personal reasons, for reasons that I want to have fun, that the subject matter is cool, that I think my kids will like it.And sometimes I just think that it will make a lot of money, like the sequel(续集) to Jurassic Park.” Paragraph 1（）
Wrongly convinced man and his accuser tell their storiesNEW YORK,NY, January 5,2010. St.Martin’s Press has announced the release of the paperback edition of Picking Cotton, a remarkable true story of what novelist John Grisham calls an ―account of violence, rage, redemption(救赎)，and, ultimately forgiveness.‖ The story began in 1987, in Burlington, North Carolina, with the rape of a young while college student named Jennifer Thompson. During her ordeal(折磨), Thompson swore(发誓) to herself that she would never forget the face of her rapist(强奸犯), a man who climbed through the window of her apartment and assaulted(攻击) her brutally. During the attack, she made an effort to memorize every detail of his face, looking for scars, tattoos( 纹身)，or other identifying marks. (46 ) When the police asked her if she could identify the assailant (袭 击者) from a book of mug shots(嫌疑犯照片), she picked one that she was sure was correct, and later she identified the same man in a lineup(行列). Based on her convincing eye witness testimony, a 22-year-old black man named Ronald Cotton was sentenced to prison for two life terms. Cotton’s lawyer appealed the decision(提出上诉), and by the time of the appeals hearing(上诉听证会), evidence had come to light suggesting that the real rapist might have been a man who looked very like Cotton, an imprisoned criminal named Bobby Poole. Another trial was held. (47 ) Jennifer Thompson looked at both men face to face, and once again said that Ronald Cotton was the one who raped her. Eleven years later, DNA evidence completely exonerated(证明??清白)Cotton and just as unequivocally(明确地) convicted Poole, who confessed to the crime. Thompson was shocked and devastated(使震惊) (48 ) ―The man I was so sure I had never seen in my life was the man who was inches from my throat, who raped me, who hurt me, who took my spirit away, who robbed me of my soul,‖ she wrote. ―And the man I had identified so surely on so many occasions was absolutely innocent.‖ Jennifer Thompson decided to meet Cotton and apologize to him personally. (49 ) Remarkably both were able to put this tragedy behind them, overcome the racial barrier that divided them, and write a book, which they have subtitled ―Our memoir(回忆录) of injustice and redemption(拯救).‖ Nevertheless, Thompson says, she still lives ―with constant pain that my profound mistake cost him so dearly. I cannot begin to imagine what would have happened had my mistaken identification occurred in a capital (可判死刑的)case. (50 ) 49（）
How we form first impression We all have first impression of someone we just met. But why? Why do we form an opinion about someone without really knowing anything about him or her – aside perhaps from a few remarks or readily observable traits. The answer is related to how your brain allows you to be aware of the world. Your brain is so sensitive in picking up facial traits, even very minor difference in a how a person’s eyes, ears, nose, or mouth are placed in relation to each other make you see him or her as different. In fact, your brain continuously processes incoming sensory information – the sights and sounds of your world. Theses incoming ―signals‖are compared against a host of ―memories‖ stored in the brain areas called the cortex (大脑皮层)system to determine what these new signals ―mean‖. If you see someone you know and like at school, your brain says ―familiar and safe‖. ―If you see someone new, it says, ―new—potentially threatening‖. Then your brain starts to match features of this stranger with other ―known‖ memories. The height, weight, dress, ethnicity, gestures and tone of voice are all matched up. The more unfamiliar the characteristics, the more your brain may say, ―This is new. I don’t like this person.‖ Or else, ―I am intrigued.‖ Or your brain may perceive a new face but familiar clothes, ethnicity, gestures –like your other friends; so your brain says: ―I like this person.‖ But theses preliminary ―impressions‖ can be dead wrong. When we stereotype people, we use a less mature form of thinking (not unlike the immature thinking of a very young child) that makes simplistic and categorical impressions of others. Rather than learn about the depth and breadth of people – their history, interest, values, strengths, and true character – we categorize them as jocks, geeks, or freaks. However, if we resist initial stereotypical impressions, we have a chance to be aware of what a person is truly like. If we spend time with a person, hear about his or her life, hopes, dreams, and become aware of the person’s character, we use a different, more mature style of thinking— and themost complex areas of our cortex, which allow us to be humane. Our thinking is not mature enough when we stereotype people because（）
微信支付 
支付宝支付