题目内容
Avner Shalev tried to keep it real. The director of Jerusalem’s recently renovated Holocaust History Museum, Yad Vashem, never liked the Disneyland feel of some rival exhibitions. Walking a reporter through the galleries, he gestures toward the authentic relics of a historical tragedy: documents, diaries — even lampposts recovered from the Warsaw ghetto. Toward the end of the tour, Shalev approaches a large beige model of the crematorium at Birkenau, by Polish sculptor Mieczyslaw Stobierski. It’s powerful — but it also breaks Shalev’s own rule about including reproductions. "Auschwitz has one," he says with a shrug. "Washington also commissioned one. I thought we should have one." Not even history, it seems, is free from the invisible hand of competition. In recent years the world’s museums commemorating the Holocaust, which killed 6 million Jews, have sprung up all over the world. Paris recently renovated its Holocaust museum. Ukraine’s is under construction. The United States is now home to more than 100. Yad Vashem opened in 1957 — three years before the first televised presidential debate and decades before anyone had ever dreamed up a DVD. Now the museum has to compete for its guests’ attention with the alluring distractions of the media age. The curators have done their best, installing more than 100 flat-screen TVs playing video clips of survivor stories. Life-size black-and-white photographs of the murdered are projected on a wall. Today’s kids may be harder to keep engaged. But Shalev also attributes the boom in Holocaust memorials to their open minds. "They don’t have to play with these guilt feelings, and suppress, and put aside," he says. There is plenty in the new museum that cries out to be suppressed. One chilling exhibit commemorates the slaughter in Ponary, Lithuania, where over a period of four years more than 70,000 Jews were lined up and shot dead, their bodies tumbling into pits. The curators have carved a deep cavity in the museum floor to symbolize the mass graves, lit only by a frail shaft of sunlight. Not all the exhibits rely on new technology. Some of the most powerful stories are told through the timeless tools of good narrative. The new museum opens with a short video depicting Jewish life in Europe before the Nazi invasion — a collection of simple, carefree images. Trenches crisscross the central corridor, marking the turning points in the 12-year story and guiding visitors through the galleries. The centerpiece is a majestic dome known as the Hall of Names; binders of documents line the walls, and hundreds of individual portraits of the dead are displayed along the dome. "Each time I’m in here, another one catches my eye," Shalev says, craning his neck. The binders in the Hall of Names represent just a fraction of the museum’s 100 million document archives, most of which never see a gallery wall. Despite the growing demand from museums around the world, Yad Vashem still often gets first pick of the artifacts offered up by Holocaust survivors. "They know that here it will be kept in a very professional manner for hundreds of years," says Shalev. They’d better; if his museum doesn’t keep pace with the times, there will always be another taker. What does Yad Vashem do to attract its guests
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Avner Shalev tried to keep it real. The director of Jerusalem’s recently renovated Holocaust History Museum, Yad Vashem, never liked the Disneyland feel of some rival exhibitions. Walking a reporter through the galleries, he gestures toward the authentic relics of a historical tragedy: documents, diaries — even lampposts recovered from the Warsaw ghetto. Toward the end of the tour, Shalev approaches a large beige model of the crematorium at Birkenau, by Polish sculptor Mieczyslaw Stobierski. It’s powerful — but it also breaks Shalev’s own rule about including reproductions. "Auschwitz has one," he says with a shrug. "Washington also commissioned one. I thought we should have one." Not even history, it seems, is free from the invisible hand of competition. In recent years the world’s museums commemorating the Holocaust, which killed 6 million Jews, have sprung up all over the world. Paris recently renovated its Holocaust museum. Ukraine’s is under construction. The United States is now home to more than 100. Yad Vashem opened in 1957 — three years before the first televised presidential debate and decades before anyone had ever dreamed up a DVD. Now the museum has to compete for its guests’ attention with the alluring distractions of the media age. The curators have done their best, installing more than 100 flat-screen TVs playing video clips of survivor stories. Life-size black-and-white photographs of the murdered are projected on a wall. Today’s kids may be harder to keep engaged. But Shalev also attributes the boom in Holocaust memorials to their open minds. "They don’t have to play with these guilt feelings, and suppress, and put aside," he says. There is plenty in the new museum that cries out to be suppressed. One chilling exhibit commemorates the slaughter in Ponary, Lithuania, where over a period of four years more than 70,000 Jews were lined up and shot dead, their bodies tumbling into pits. The curators have carved a deep cavity in the museum floor to symbolize the mass graves, lit only by a frail shaft of sunlight. Not all the exhibits rely on new technology. Some of the most powerful stories are told through the timeless tools of good narrative. The new museum opens with a short video depicting Jewish life in Europe before the Nazi invasion — a collection of simple, carefree images. Trenches crisscross the central corridor, marking the turning points in the 12-year story and guiding visitors through the galleries. The centerpiece is a majestic dome known as the Hall of Names; binders of documents line the walls, and hundreds of individual portraits of the dead are displayed along the dome. "Each time I’m in here, another one catches my eye," Shalev says, craning his neck. The binders in the Hall of Names represent just a fraction of the museum’s 100 million document archives, most of which never see a gallery wall. Despite the growing demand from museums around the world, Yad Vashem still often gets first pick of the artifacts offered up by Holocaust survivors. "They know that here it will be kept in a very professional manner for hundreds of years," says Shalev. They’d better; if his museum doesn’t keep pace with the times, there will always be another taker. Which of the following statements is INCORRECT
Avner Shalev tried to keep it real. The director of Jerusalem’s recently renovated Holocaust History Museum, Yad Vashem, never liked the Disneyland feel of some rival exhibitions. Walking a reporter through the galleries, he gestures toward the authentic relics of a historical tragedy: documents, diaries — even lampposts recovered from the Warsaw ghetto. Toward the end of the tour, Shalev approaches a large beige model of the crematorium at Birkenau, by Polish sculptor Mieczyslaw Stobierski. It’s powerful — but it also breaks Shalev’s own rule about including reproductions. "Auschwitz has one," he says with a shrug. "Washington also commissioned one. I thought we should have one." Not even history, it seems, is free from the invisible hand of competition.In recent years the world’s museums commemorating the Holocaust, which killed 6 million Jews, have sprung up all over the world. Paris recently renovated its Holocaust museum. Ukraine’s is under construction. The United States is now home to more than 100. Yad Vashem opened in 1957 — three years before the first televised presidential debate and decades before anyone had ever dreamed up a DVD. Now the museum has to compete for its guests’ attention with the alluring distractions of the media age. The curators have done their best, installing more than 100 flat-screen TVs playing video clips of survivor stories. Life-size black-and-white photographs of the murdered are projected on a wall. Today’s kids may be harder to keep engaged. But Shalev also attributes the boom in Holocaust memorials to their open minds. "They don’t have to play with these guilt feelings, and suppress, and put aside," he says.There is plenty in the new museum that cries out to be suppressed. One chilling exhibit commemorates the slaughter in Ponary, Lithuania, where over a period of four years more than 70,000 Jews were lined up and shot dead, their bodies tumbling into pits. The curators have carved a deep cavity in the museum floor to symbolize the mass graves, lit only by a frail shaft of sunlight.Not all the exhibits rely on new technology. Some of the most powerful stories are told through the timeless tools of good narrative. The new museum opens with a short video depicting Jewish life in Europe before the Nazi invasion — a collection of simple, carefree images.Trenches crisscross the central corridor, marking the turning points in the 12-year story and guiding visitors through the galleries. The centerpiece is a majestic dome known as the Hall of Names; binders of documents line the walls, and hundreds of individual portraits of the dead are displayed along the dome. "Each time I’m in here, another one catches my eye," Shalev says, craning his neck.The binders in the Hall of Names represent just a fraction of the museum’s 100 million document archives, most of which never see a gallery wall. Despite the growing demand from museums around the world, Yad Vashem still often gets first pick of the artifacts offered up by Holocaust survivors. "They know that here it will be kept in a very professional manner for hundreds of years," says Shalev. They’d better; if his museum doesn’t keep pace with the times, there will always be another taker. Yad Vashem has the priority to get the artifacts offered by the Holocaust survivors because（）.
Atheism itself, atheism as such, isn’t and can’t be a movement, because atheism is, at a minimum, simply non-theism: non-belief in any god. Mere non-belief in any X can’t by itself constitute a movement, because it’s merely an absence (or at most a refusal) of belief. If every absence of belief amounted to a movement, the traffic jam would be a nightmare. A belief about the world shouldn’t necessarily commit us to political action — we have to be able to say "No" to affirmative beliefs about the world without thereby signing up to a campaign. We need to be able to make such choices more freely than such a requirement would allow. Atheism can however include something like a movement, of course, as can other beliefs and non-beliefs. Some of the disagreement among atheists is around this issue. Many atheists want to be able to be atheists without being dragged into some boring noisy unsubtle bad-tempered "movement". Many other atheists want to be able to be open explicit unbashful atheists without constantly being told to be more euphemistic or evasive or respectful or just plain silent by other atheists, who surely ought to know better. This "who surely ought to know better" is one place where the disagreement really grips. To the first group — let’s call them plain atheists — this idea looks like typical political hegemonising, like ideological policing, like the demand for uniformity and agreement and loyalty that always goes with a "movement". It looks like groupthink. To the second group — call them movement atheists — that’s not it, it’s just that other atheists should understand that euphemism and respect have been the norm for a long time and we really ought to be allowed to talk freely. Although I am in the second group, I clearly know the problem, of course, is that what each group wants is incompatible with what the other group wants. In a perfect world, plain atheists could just ignore movement atheists, and movement atheists could mutter away without disturbing their quieter friends. But in the real world, many plain atheists feel that movement atheists bring the whole notion of atheism into disrepute. We make it more difficult for plain atheists to be just that, because the world at large now thinks of atheists in general as movement atheists. I see the difficulty, but I also think that plain atheists should to some extent put up with it. We don’t actually want to drag them into "the movement" but we would like to be able to talk freely without even other atheists telling us to pipe down. Where one locates oneself on this map depends partly on whether one thinks religion is mostly benign, or mostly harmful, or a difficult-to-unravel mix of the two. It’s not a neat mapping though — I’m a committed "movement" atheist in the sense that I really do think taboos on open discussion of religion should go away, but I also think religion is a difficult-to-unravel mix of the benign and the harmful. But then I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that all "new" or movement atheists match that description too. Which can properly describe the author’s attitude to religion
The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman is arguably one of the most influential voices in current American journalism. The Brandeis-and Oxford-schooled Friedman writes engagingly on such heavy-duty subjects as immigration law, oil addiction, and outsourcing. His examination of globalism, The World is Flat, has sold two million copies, and he is a solid favorite to win his fourth Pulitzer Prize for his latest best-seller, Hot, Flat, and Crowded. No ivory-tower thinker, he’s connecting with people in real life about the power of retooling the world’s economy by preserving the planet. "I’m getting big, big audiences. It tells me that people are really hungry to talk about this agenda." How would you summarize your new book The core of this book is that clean energy technology, clean water, all the clean sources of growth and sustenance are going to be the next great global industry. I know that for sure. What I don’t know is who’s going to lead that industry. Is it going to be America Is it going to be Russia, China, Japan, India All I know is ET, energy technology, is going to be the next great global industry, and if we want to maintain our standard of living we have to lead that industry. I want to make America the example of a country that grows rich, innovative, entrepreneurial, competitive, healthy, secure, and respected by taking the lead in inventing "clean and green" power, because I think many more people will follow us voluntarily than will ever reduce their emissions by compulsion of a treaty. If we build it, they will come. An op-ed in the Washington Post titled "Don’t Go There" argued that tourism is "nothing short of a planet-threatening plague". What’s your take In a world of increasingly rising, dangerous levels of CO2, and in a world of rising middle classes of India, China, Russia, Brazil — where more and more people will be able to do package tours like Americans or Europeans have done for years — there is no question that tourism has to put stress on ecosystems, on beaches, coral reefs, forests, ski slopes, and on ancient and cherished sites. But I just have a hard time saying, "Don’t go there." Those charged with protecting those ecosystems have to be that much more vigilant. The real point is pay attention wherever you are. Pay attention to your environment, your ecosystem, your carbon footprint, whether you’re at home or abroad. And if we all do that, then there’s no reason that travel will hurt things. If none of us do that or we only do that episodically, then even the smallest amount of travel will cause damage. A hundred tourists can spoil a great site or a lush valley as easily as 100,000 if you don’t have the right regulations. As parents, how can we inculcate in our children the idea of seeing and embracing the world When our girls were very young, my wife taught a class called World Class. She would pick a country or a city or a culture and do a little lesson about it for kids once a week. Other parents used to drop their kids off at our house to take the class. And so from a very young age, our girls were taught to be interested in and love different cultures, to go to museums, things of that nature. And that’s the most important thing you can do. You have to start them young. And another way to do that is to subscribe to magazines and newspapers. I got interested in news because my parents subscribed to Time magazine. Take your kids out to different dining experiences. Expose them to foreign movies. Make sure they study a foreign language in school. There are just myriad ways to get your kids to appreciate different cultures. Our girls are 23 and 20 now. They were both born in Jerusalem, so their very first trip was coming to America. Paragraph 3 is mainly about Friedman’s opinion on
微信支付 
支付宝支付