【正文】 xamples of past arts and literature.At times it is difficult to determine what exactly is the difference between contemporary culture and the arts and literature of the past. Shakespeare39。s classic writings are continuously being adapted into current movies that are often big hits with students and the general population as a whole. Millions of people every year view classic works of art in museums all over the world. Readings of religious texts have never gone out of style with a large part of the world39。s population. Clashes between centuriesold cultures and religions, such as that of Western countries and Islamic extremists and that of Hindus and Muslims in India, demonstrate that the religious artifacts that could be called arts and literature of the past are very much a part of contemporary culture.While the past can certainly not be ignored, a large part of what students must learn at university is based on contemporary culture. Most religious learning, at least of one39。s own religion, occurs either at home or early on in a student39。s education. At the university level, studies of politics, business and the puter sciences must deal in great detail with the latest advances in contemporary culture in order to remain up to date and relevant. Other subjects, such as mathematics, agriculture, and the arts and literature themselves look largely to the past for the core knowledge that is taught in these courses. The application of these lessons from the past are entirely appropriate to help put contemporary culture into some type of historical context that can help students to understand and prehend the rapidly changing world that they are living in.It would seem selfevident that a properly educated university student must find a balance between studying contemporary culture without neglecting the study of arts and literature of the past. The study of one is not mutually exclusive of the study of the other. The benefits of a wellrounded education e from not only knowing the state of the world as it exists today but also in knowing how the world arrived at this stage of development in the first place.觀點(diǎn)陳述型作文/[題目]學(xué)院和大學(xué)應(yīng)該開(kāi)設(shè)更多通俗音樂(lè)、電影、廣告和電視方面的課程，因?yàn)楫?dāng)代文化要比昔日的藝術(shù)和文學(xué)對(duì)于學(xué)生具有遠(yuǎn)為密切的聯(lián)系。[范文正文]只要當(dāng)代文化依照其定義具有當(dāng)代性，它無(wú)疑比昔日的藝術(shù)和文學(xué)對(duì)學(xué)生乃至普通大眾具有一種遠(yuǎn)為直接的影響。同時(shí)代的事件會(huì)直接影響到生活在那一時(shí)代的每一個(gè)人，因?yàn)樗鼈兊陌l(fā)生與這個(gè)人的生存正值同時(shí)。但這里我們可以復(fù)述一位著名哲學(xué)家的話，那些無(wú)法從歷史中汲取教訓(xùn)者注定會(huì)重蹈覆轍。在相當(dāng)大的程度上，昔日的藝術(shù)和文學(xué)造就了我們現(xiàn)如今的情狀，其作用即使并不甚于當(dāng)代文化，至少與當(dāng)代文化相同。 生活于當(dāng)今時(shí)代的每個(gè)人以一種或另一種方式深受過(guò)去事件的影響。昔日的事件直接導(dǎo)致了世界目前的運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)方式。藝術(shù)和文學(xué)是保存和記載得最為完善的一種資源，它們能使我們與過(guò)去實(shí)際發(fā)生過(guò)的事情直接聯(lián)系起來(lái)。 不妨考慮一下《圣經(jīng)》，《可蘭經(jīng)》一類的宗教著作，孔子的著述，以及那些與佛教、印度教和所有其他宗教相關(guān)的著作。這些直接地與當(dāng)今時(shí)代人們的行為相關(guān)，并在某些情形中在相當(dāng)大的程度上控制著當(dāng)今時(shí)代人們的行為，雖然它們大多數(shù)創(chuàng)作于數(shù)百年、甚至數(shù)千年之前。與這些宗教相關(guān)的藝術(shù)品同樣也產(chǎn)生了深遠(yuǎn)的影響。我們不妨考慮一下梵蒂岡西斯廷教堂內(nèi)米開(kāi)朗琪羅的作品，或遍布亞洲的無(wú)數(shù)具有歷史性意義的佛教像，或者散布在整個(gè)中東和中亞地區(qū)的古代穆斯林清真寺。與這些過(guò)去的藝術(shù)和文學(xué)實(shí)例的相關(guān)性相比，當(dāng)代文化被說(shuō)成與當(dāng)今學(xué)生更密切相關(guān)，這一論點(diǎn)是難以成立的。有些時(shí)候，人們難以確定當(dāng)代文化與過(guò)去的藝術(shù)和文學(xué)的差異究竟何在。莎士比亞的經(jīng)典之作不斷地被改編成當(dāng)代電影，常常能成為學(xué)生和普通大眾的大熱門(mén)。每年，全世界數(shù)百萬(wàn)人在博物館觀賞古典藝術(shù)作品。宗教文本的閱讀對(duì)于世界相當(dāng)大的一部分人口而言從來(lái)就不失為一種風(fēng)尚。數(shù)個(gè)世紀(jì)古老的文化與宗教之間的沖突，如西方國(guó)家與伊斯蘭極端主義者之間的沖突，以及印度國(guó)內(nèi)印度教徒與穆斯林教徒之間的沖突，例證著那些可被稱為昔日藝術(shù)和文學(xué)的宗教事物在很大程度上實(shí)乃當(dāng)代文化的一部分。雖然過(guò)去無(wú)疑不能被淡忘，但學(xué)生在大學(xué)中所學(xué)內(nèi)容，很大一部分是基于當(dāng)代文化的。大多數(shù)宗教學(xué)習(xí)，至少一個(gè)人自身的宗教的學(xué)習(xí)，或始于家庭，或始于學(xué)生受教育的早期。在大學(xué)這一層次上，對(duì)政治、商科以及計(jì)算機(jī)科學(xué)的學(xué)習(xí)，與當(dāng)代文化中的最新進(jìn)步深深相涉，以便使人與時(shí)俱進(jìn)，與時(shí)代緊密相關(guān)。其它的學(xué)科，如數(shù)學(xué)、農(nóng)業(yè)、藝術(shù)與文學(xué)，很大程度上是從過(guò)去的源泉獲取這些課程中所傳授的核心知識(shí)。這些來(lái)自過(guò)去的課程的應(yīng)用完全是恰當(dāng)?shù)?，有助于將?dāng)代文化置于某種歷史架構(gòu)之中，去幫助學(xué)生領(lǐng)略和理解他們所生活于其中的那個(gè)變化迅速的世界。有一點(diǎn)似乎是不證自明的，即一個(gè)受過(guò)恰當(dāng)教育的大學(xué)生必須在學(xué)習(xí)當(dāng)代文化與不偏廢昔日藝術(shù)和文學(xué)之間尋找到某種平衡。對(duì)兩者的學(xué)習(xí)并非互為排斥。一種綜合全面的教育，其益處不僅在于讓人知道當(dāng)今世界所處的狀態(tài)，而且亦在于首先要讓人弄清世界是何以抵達(dá)目前這一發(fā)展階段的。6TopicThe following is a letter to the editor of the Atticus City newspaperFormer Mayor Durant owes an apology to the city of Atticus. Both the damage to the River Bridge, which connects Atticus to Hartley, and the traffic problems we have long experienced on the bridge were actually caused 20 years ago by Durant. After all, he is the one who approved the construction of the bridge. If he had approved a wider and betterdesigned bridge, on which approximately the same amount of public money would have been spent, none of the damage or problems would have occurred. Instead, the River Bridge has deteriorated far more rapidly over the past 20 years than has the much longer Derby Bridge up the river. Even though the winters have been severe in the past several years, this is no excuse for the negligence and wastefulness of Durant.Sample EssayThe author of this letter concludes in his or her argument that former Mayor Durant should apologize to the city of Atticus because he is at fault for damage that has occurred over a twentyyear time span to the River Bridge. The author also blames Mayor Durant for longtime traffic problems on the bridge, stating that Durant actually caused these problems twenty years before because he approved the construction of the bridge and did not approve a wider and betterdesigned bridge. The arguer may have a personal vendetta against Mayor Durant but the elements stated in the argument do not support such an accusation.First of all, the author squarely places blame on Mayor Durant for the simple act of approving the construction of the bridge. There is no evidence presented that merely approving the building of the bridge had anything whatsoever to do with the damage that has occurred or the traffic problems on the bridge. It is entirely possible that Mr. Durant simply approved the idea of constructing the bridge and not the design of the bridge or the contractor that built it. Simply approving the construction of the bridge does not in and of itself cause damage to that bridge or any resulting traffic problems.In addition, the arguer concludes that if Mayor Durant had approved a wider and betterdesigned bridge that there would be no damage or traffic problems, an argument for which there is no basis of proof offered. It is a wellknown fact that bridges are subject to deterioration, particularly over a period of twenty years, no matter how well designed they may be. The author also fails to offer any supporting evidence to show that a more durable bridge with fewer traffic problems could have been built for a