Only a man who hates himself and loves humanity could possibly become an actor, but to become an actor doing plays for live television is without doubt the most ghastly torture ever invented for the acting profession. So, at least, a well-known actor has stated and I am quite prepared to believe it.Consider for yourself. For one thing the unseen audience may number millions. If you forget your lines there is no hope whatsoever of being prompted and the only resource left to you is that of mouthing silently at the cameras in the vain hope that thousands of viewers will think that the fault is in their sets rather than that the actor is incompetent.There is a story told by a famous actor of his experiences in this field which gives me intense pleasure whenever I read it. The types of part he usually plays are generally somewhat stiff-upper-lip typically British parts. He was due to act in a live television show where the script was of indifferent quality, rehearsals had been sketchy and a great deal more attention had been paid to the trappings of the production than to its actual quality.He claims himself that acting live on television scares him stiff. However, on this occasion he was determined to give as good an impression as possible of the “stiff-upper-lip.” He was acting a part where the costume was fairly simple and his idea of making a “calm and collected” impression was to leave the main items (coat, briefcase and beret) in the little hut he had been assigned as a dressing room and stroll about the stage five minutes before the performance was due to start, apparently totally unprepared. This worked beautifully.Everyone naturally, from the producer to the humblest stage-hand, begged him to get ready. “Two minutes will be quite enough,” he stated calmly, puffing at an enormous cigar. Two minutes before the live show was due to start he strolled to the dressing room and tried to open the door. It was locked. He then describes himself as being changed into a gibbering nervous wreck, shouting and screaming for help. He finally went on the set with his coat on back to front and covered with wood-shavings from having had to break down the door. He forgot his lines and the cool Englishman with the iron nerve he was supposed to be playing turned into, as he describes it, a furtive little man with a dirty coat, a stammer and a nervous twitch. He has now decided that live television is not for him, a fact which will hardly surprise the reader.1.According to the author, what kind of person could become an actor on live television?2.The type of the part the actor usually plays is（ ）.3.The actor did not go to get his main items in advance in order to（ ）.4.In the end the Englishman the actor played on the stage must have looked（ ）.
A.One who is talented in acting. B.One who wants to be well-known. C.One who is prepared to be tortured. D.One who has much passion.
问题2：
A.a cool calm Englishman B.a typical British upper-class C.an unqualified British actor D.an Englishman with humble looks
问题3：
A.win more time to calm himself down B.exhibit the character of the part he played C.give a good impression of himself to the audience D.scare everyone from the producer to the stage-hand
问题4：
A.funny and nasty B.scared and depressed C.cool and relaxed D.delighted and excited
The short, smiling man who introduce himself as the manager denied that we had paid more than other people, though he did admit that we had been put in a “special” room.
A.who introduce himself B.as the manager denied C.did admit D.had been put E.没有错误
That's all right, it is better to （ ） the feeling than to let it build up.
A.displace B.disarm C.discharge D.dispatch
Many social observers in China are concerned that children growing up in villages away from their mother and father lack of parental love and may have trouble becoming responsible adults as they enter their twenties.
A.are concerned that B.lack of parental love C.trouble becoming D.as they enter their twenties E.没有错误
The difference in tone and language must strike us, as soon as it is philosophy that speaks: that change should remind us that even if the function of religion and that of reason coincide. This function is performed in the two cases by very different organs. Religions are many, reason one. Religion consists of conscious ideas, hopes, enthusiasms, and objects of worship; it operates by grace and flourishes by prayer. Reason, on the other hand, is a mere principle or potential order, on which indeed we may come to reflect but which exists in us ideally only, without variation or stress of any kind. We conform or do not conform to it; it does not urge or chide us, not call for any emotions on our part other than those naturally aroused by the various objects which it unfolds in their true nature and proportion. Religion brings some order into life by weighting it with new materials. Reason adds to the natural materials only the perfect order which it introduces into them. Rationality is nothing but a form, an ideal .constitution which experience may more or less embody. Religion is a part of experience itself, a mass of sentiments and ideas. The one is an inviolate principle, the other a changing and struggling force. And yet this struggling and changing force of religion seems to direct man toward something eternal. It seems to make for an ultimate harmony within the soul and for an ultimate harmony between the soul and all that the soul depends upon. Religion, in its intent is a more conscious and direct pursuit of the Life of Reason than is society. Science, or art, for these approach and fill out the ideal life tentatively and piecemeal, hardly regarding the foal or caring for the ultimate justification of the instinctive aims. Religion also has an instinctive and blind side and bubbles up in all manner of chance practices and intuitions; soon, however, it feels its way toward the heart or things, and from whatever quarter it may come, veers in the direction of the ultimate.
Nevertheless, we must confess that this religious pursuit of the Life of Reason has been singularly abortive. Those within the pale of each religion may prevail upon themselves, to express satisfaction with its results, thanks to a fond partiality in reading the past and generous draughts of hope for the future; but any one regarding the various religions at once and comparing their achievements with what reason requires, must feel how terrible is the disappointment which they have one and all prepared for mankind. Their chief anxiety has been to offer imaginary remedies for mortal ills, some of which are incurable essentially, while others might have been really cured by well-directed effort. The Greed oracles, for instance, pretended to heal out natural ignorance, which has its appropriate though difficult cure, while the Christian vision of heaven pretended to be an antidote to our natural death—the inevitable correlate of birth and of a changing and conditioned existence. By methods of this sort little can be done for the real betterment of life. To confuse intelligence and dislocate sentiment by gratuitous fictions is a short-sighted way of pursuing happiness. Nature is soon avenged. An unhealthy exaltation and a one-sided morality have to be followed by regrettable reactions. When these come. The real rewards of life may seem vain to a relaxed vitality, and the very name of virtue may irritate young spirits untrained in natural excellence. Thus religion too often debauches the morality it comes to sanction and impedes the science it ought to fulfill.What is the secret of this ineptitude? Why does religion, so near to rationality in its purpose, fall so short of it in results? The answer is easy; religion pursues rationality through the imagination. When it explains events or assigns causes, it is an imaginative substitute for science. When it gives precepts, insinuates ideals, or remolds aspiration, it is an imaginative substitute for wisdom—I mean for the deliberate and impartial pursuit of all food. The condition and the aims of lif
The new policy has （ ）a large amount of investment for industry and business in this city.
A.acquainted B.adhered C.activated D.asserted
We all buy things on the （ ） of the moment; this is what the retail trade calls an “impulse buy”.
A.urge B.force C.spur D.rush
Producing elastic through chemical synthesis is a tedious process consuming three months.
A.the better half of B.for the better of C.all the better for D.the better part of
Over the past few years, outcries from food activists have changed many Americans' eating habits: Criticism of widespread pesticide use led many consumers to organic foods, and early warnings prompted shoppers to shun irradiated and genetically altered food. （1） Major players have muscled laws through state legislatures. The statutes make it illegal to suggest that a particular food is unsafe without a “sound scientific basis” for the claim. These so-called banana bills are under discussion in several US states.Banana bill backers believe the laws will protect agricultural producers from losses like those following the Alar scare in 1989, when the TV magazine show 60 Minutes publicized a Natural Resources Defense Council report charging that the chemical, which enhances the appearance of apples, causes cancer.（2 ） Banana bill foes say the laws simply serve to repress those who speak out against risky food-produce with “acceptable” levels of pesticides, genetically altered tomatoes, milk from cows injected with the growth hormone rBST, which boosts milk production. （3 ） They call them an insult to free speech and an impediment to covering critical food safety issues, notes Nicols Fox in American Journalism Review (March 1995). Most critics question the laws' requirement that only charges based on “reasonable and reliable” evidence be allowed. （4） After all, it's unlikely that agribusinesses will accept even the best evidence if it threatens their bottom line. Fox notes that even though the Environmental Protection Agency affirmed that Alar posed unacceptable health risks, Washington State Farm Bureau spokesperson Peter Stemberg insists that EPA's science is “subject to second opinion.” —opinions that challenged accepted wisdom.Instead of attacking what they sneer as “junk science”, food producers should be listening to the public's food worries, says Sierra's Rauber, who cites a recent Young &
In the case of mobile phones, change is everything. Recent research indicates that the mobile phone is changing not only our culture, but our very bodies as well.
First, let’s talk about culture. The difference between the mobile phone and its parent, the fixed-line phone is, you get whoever answers it.This has several implications. The most common one, however, and perhaps the thing that has changed our culture forever, is the “meeting” influence. People no longer need to make firm plans about when and where to meet. Twenty years ago, a Friday night would need to be arranged in advance.You needed enough time to allow everyone to get from their place of work to the first meeting place. Now, however, a night out can be arranged on the run. It is no longer "see you there at 8", but "text me around 8 and we’ll see where we all are".Texting changes people as well. In their paper, “Insight into the Social and Psychological Effects of SMS Text Messaging”，two British researchers distinguished between two types of mobile phone users: the “talkers” and the lexters”一those who prefer voice to text message and those who prefer text to voice.They found that the mobile phone’s individuality and privacy gave texters the ability to express a whole new outer personality. Texters were likely to report that their family would be surprised if they were to read their texts. This suggests that texting allowed texters to present a self-image that differed from the one familiar to those who knew them well.Another scientist wrote of the changes that mobiles have brought to body language.There are two kinds that people use while speaking on the phone. There is the “speakeasy”： the head is held high, in a self-confident way, chatting away. And there is the “spacemaker”： these people focus on themselves and keep out other people.Who can blame them? Phone meetings get cancelled or reformed and camera-phones intrude on people’s privacy. So, it is understandable if your mobile makes you nervous. But perhaps you needn't worry so much. After all, it is good to talk.1.When people plan to meet nowadays, they （ ）.2.According to the two British researchers, the social and psychological effects are mostly likely to be seen on（ ） .3.We can infer from the passage that the texts sent by texters are（ ） .4.According to the passage, is afraid of being heard while talking on the mobile（ ）.5.An appropriate title for the passage might be（ ） .
A.arrange the meeting place beforehand B.postpone fixing the place till last minute C.seldom care about when and where to meet D.still love to work out detailed meeting plans问题2： A.TALKERS B.the "speakeasy" C.the "spacemaker*' D.texters问题3： A.quite revealing B.well written C.unacceptable D.shocking to others问题4： A.talkers B.the speakeasy C.the ‘ spacemaker, D.texters问题5： A.The SMS effect B.Cultural implication of mobile use C.Change in the use of the mobile D.Body language and the mobile phone