下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
When I decided to quit my full-time employment it never occurred to me that I might become a part of a new international trend. A lateral move that hurt my pride and blocked my professional progress prompted me to abandon my relatively high profile career although, in the manner of a disgraced government minister, I covered my exit by claiming “I wanted to spend more time with my family”.
Curiously, some two-and-a-half years and two novels later, my experiment in what the Americans term “downshifting” has turned my tired excuse into an absolute reality. I have been transformed from a passionate advocate of the philosophy of “having it all”, preached by Linda Kelsey for the past seven years in the page of She magazine, into a woman who is happy to settle for a bit of everything.
I have discovered, as perhaps Kelsey will after her much-publicized resignation from the editorship of She after a build-up of stress, that abandoning the doctrine of “juggling your life”, and making the alternative move into “downshifting” brings with it far greater rewards than financial success and social status. Nothing could persuade me to return to the kind of life Kelsey used to advocate and I once enjoyed: 12-hour working days, pressured deadlines, the fearful strain of office politics and the limitations of being a parent on “quality time”.
In America, the move away from juggling to a simpler, less materialistic lifestyle is a well-established trend. Downshifting—also known in America as “voluntary simplicity”—has, ironically, even bred a new area of what might be termed anti-consumerism. There are a number of best-selling downshifting self-help books for people who want to simplify their lives; there are newsletters, such as The Tightwad Gazette , that give hundreds of thousands of Americans useful tips on anything from recycling their cling-film to making their own soap; there are even support groups for those who want to achieve the mid-'90s equivalent of dropping out.
While in America the trend started as a reaction to the economic decline—after the mass redundancies caused by downsizing in the late '80s—and is still linked to the politics of thrift, in Britain, at least among the middle-class downshifters of my acquaintance, we have different reasons for seeking to simplify our lives.
For the women of my generation who were urged to keep juggling through the '80s, downshifting in the mid-'90s is not so much a search for the mythical good life—growing your own organic vegetables, and risking turning into one—as a personal recognition of your limitations.
1. Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 1?
A. Full-time employment is a new international trend.
B. The writer was compelled by circumstances to leave her job.
C. “A lateral move” means stepping out of full-time employment.
D. The writer was only too eager to spend more time with her family.
2. The writer's experiment shows that downshifting ______.
A. enables her to realize her dream
B. helps her mold a new philosophy of life
C. prompts her to abandon her high social status
D. leads her to accept the doctrine of She magazine
3. “Juggling one's life” probably means living a life characterized by ______.
A. non-materialistic lifestyle
B. a bit of everything
C. extreme stress
D. anti-consumerism
4. According to the passage, all of the following are true EXCEPT ______.
A. The Tightwad Gazette is in favor of mater-ialistic lifestyle
B. a lot of self-help books can help people simplify their lives
C. downshifting has brought about a new area of anti-consumerism
D. newsletters give useful tips on how to lead a simple life
5. According to the author, downshifting emerged in the U.S. as a result of ______.
A. the quick pace of modern life
B. man's adventurous spirit
C. man's search for mythical experiences
D. the economic situation
Chris Niedenthal, a Warsaw-based photographer, has taken to slathering his cheese with butter. When he's thirsty, sometimes he gulps down a nice tall glass of 30%-fat heavy cream. For breakfast he'll have all the bacon and eggs he wants—but no toast. What is missing from his diet? Fruits, vegetables and all but 50g of carbohydrates a day. “The best thing, really, is fried pork,” he says.
As sure as a yo-yo goes down, then right back up, there will always be new diets. There will always be people willing to offer glowing testimonials to add to the bottom line of the estimated $35 billion—in the U.S. alone—diet industry. Niedenthal says that not only has he lost 12kg in 18 months on his counterintuitive diet regime, “I have much more energy and my complexion has improved.” As for his cholesterol levels, well, he hasn't had them checked yet.
The diet that Niedenthal follows, the “Optimal Nourishment” plan, was developed by a Pole named Jan Kwasniewski, a doctor whose books are sold on street corners. Optimal Nourishment also resembles a version of the extreme low-carbohydrate mania now sweeping the United States; rumor has it that television star Jennifer Aniston owes her new skinny frame to it. Several current best sellers including a new edition of the Diet Revolution by Dr. Robert C. Atkins of the 1970s and a new book called Sugar Busters! by some very clever businessmen and a doctor.
The idea behind Sugar Busters! is that anything that raises insulin levels, such as sugar, potatoes, corn, white rice, bread from refined flour, fresh fruits or milk, is bad for you. This notion originally came from the writings of France's favorite diet writer, Michel Montignac. The French may have obesity levels of only around 8% (three times lower than Americans), but as their love of anti-cellulite creams reveals, they are not immune from a belief in the miracle cure, and Montignac has benefited handsomely. A former employee of a pharmaceutical firm, he has written 11 books which have sold 9 million copies in 28 countries, espousing the Montignac Method: consume those carbohydrates that reduce the glucose in the blood. “If you're overweight it's not that you eat too much but that you don't eat well,” Montignac says. “It's complete nonsense today to say that in order to lose weight one has to do sports.”
But perhaps not as nonsensical as some of the other weird stuff out there. In Britain there's a new product called “X-Fat” that is derived from shellfish and allegedly keeps fat from being absorbed by the body. Some Germans have taken to drinking cider vinegar neat. And the truly desperate can always munch on Matricur, a sponge that, when swallowed, swells to 18 times its size and fills up the stomach. After about eight hours, the spongy protein ball, made of cow skin, is digested.
Not surprisingly, all of this makes nutrition experts despair. “If those methods worked, there wouldn't be a billion-dollar diet industry,” says Bettye Travis, president of the board of directors of the U.S. National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance. “People would lose their excess weight and that would be it.” British dietician Lyndel Costain agrees. “As slimming industry's profits get bigger,” she notes, “so do our waistlines.”
1. Which of the following is the best title for this passage?
A. Arrange Our Everyday Diet for Health
B. Get Thin Quick—An Update Report
C. Follow the “Optimal Nourishment” Plan
D. Get the Food Well Digested
2. The example of Chris Niedenthal in the first paragraph is used to illustrate that ______.
A. Chris Niedenthal is a person with a terrific appetite
B. the author is against Chris Niedenthal's diet
C. unreasonable diet may contribute to one's overweight
D. Chris Niedenthal has a high cholesterol level in his body
3. Which of the following is mentioned in the third paragraph?
A. The “Optimal Nourishment” plan was forwarded by a bishop.
B. Jennifer Aniston contributes her stature to the Optimal Nourishment.
C. Robert C.Atkins was publisher of a book named Diet Revolution .
D. Jan Kwasniewski is a doctor from Poland.
4. The author's attitude towards those diet regimes is probably one of ______.
A. opposition
B. agreement
C. indifference
D. conservation
5. Who will not support those different slimming diets according to the passage?
A. The public figures like the film stars, television stars and sports stars.
B. The doctors such as Jan Kwasniewski and Robert C. Atkins.
C. The nutrition experts such as Bettye Travis and Lyndel Costain.
D. The writers like the diet writer Michel Montignac.
Massive changes in all of the world's deeply cherished sporting habits are underway. Whether it's one of London's parks full of people playing softball, and Russians taking up rugby or the Super Bowl rivaling the British Football Final as a televised spectator event in Britain, the patterns of players and spectators are changing beyond recognition. We are witnessing a globalization of our sporting culture.
That annual bicycle race, the Tour de France, much loved by the French is a good case in point. Just a few years back it was a strictly continental affair with France, Belgium and Holland, Spain and Italy taking part. But in recent years it has been dominated by Colombian mountain climbers, and American and Irish riders.
The people who really matter welcome the shift toward globalization. Peugeot, Michelin and Panasonic are multi-national corporations that want worldwide returns for the millions they invest in teams. So it does them literally a world of good to see this unofficial world championship become just that.
This is undoubtedly an economic-based revolution we are witnessing here, one made possible by communications technology, but made to happen because of marketing considerations. Sell the game and you can sell Cola or Budweiser as well.
The skillful way in which American football has been sold to Europe is a good example of how all sports will develop. The aim of course is not really to spread the sport for its own sake, but to increase the number of people interested in the major money-making events. The economics of the Superbowl are already astronomical. With seats at 125 dollars, gate receipts alone were a staggering 10,000,00. The most important statistic of the day, however, was the 100,000,000 in TV advertising fees. Imagine how much that becomes when the eyes of the world are watching.
So it came as a terrible shock, but not really a surprise, to learn that some people are now suggesting that soccer change from being a game of two 45-minute halves, to one of four 25-minute quarters. The idea is unashamedly to capture more advertising revenue, without giving any thought for the integrity of a sport which relies for its essence on the flowing nature of the action.
Moreover, as sports expand into world markets, and as our choice of sports as consumers also grows, so we will demand to see them played at a higher and higher level. In boxing we have already seen numerous, dubious world title categories because people will not pay to see anything less than a “World Title” fight, and this means that the title fights have to be held in different countries around the world!
1. Globalization of sporting culture means that ______.
A. more people are taking up sports
B. traditional sports are getting popular
C. many local sports are becoming international
D. foreigners are more interested in local sports
2. The sports change towards globalization is favorably embraced by ______.
A. multi-national corporations that want economic returns
B. sports stars
C. people all over the world
D. local people
3. Which of the following is NOT related to the massive changes of sports?
A. Good economic returns.
B. Revival of sports.
C. Communications technology.
D. Marketing strategies.
4. What is the author's attitude towards the suggestion to change soccer into one of four 25-minute quarters?
A. Favorable.
B. Unclear.
C. Reserved.
D. Critical.
5. People want to see higher-level sports competitions mainly because _______.
A. they become more professional than ever
B. they regard sports as consumer goods
C. there exist few world-class championships
D. they face a wider range of sports
Prior to the 20th century, many languages with small numbers of speakers survived for centuries. The increasingly interconnected modern world makes it much more difficult for small language communities to live in relative isolation, a key factor in language maintenance and preservation.
It remains to be seen whether the world can maintain its linguistic and cultural diversity in the centuries ahead. Many powerful forces appear to work against it: population growth, which pushes migrant populations into the world's last isolated locations; mass tourism; global telecommunications and mass media; and the spread of gigantic global corporations. All of these forces appear to signify a future in which the language of advertising, popular culture, and consumer products become similar. Already English and a few other major tongues have emerged as global languages of commerce and communication. For many of the world's peoples, learning one of these languages is viewed as the key to education, economic opportunity, and a better way of life.
Only about 3,000 languages now in use are expected to survive the coming century. Are most of the rest doomed in the century after that?
Whether most of these languages survive will probably depend on how strongly cultural groups wish to keep their identity alive through a native language. To do so will require an emphasis on bilingualism (mastery of two languages). Bilingual speakers could use their own language in smaller spheres—at home, among friends, in community settings—and a global language at work, in dealings with government, and in commercial spheres. In this way, many small languages could sustain their cultural and linguistic integrity alongside global languages, rather than yield to the homogenizing forces of globalization.
Ironically, the trend of technological innovation that has threatened minority languages could also help save them. For example, some experts predict that computer software translation tools will one day permit minority language speakers to browse the Internet using their native tongues. Linguists are currently using computer-aided learning tools to teach a variety of threatened languages.
For many endangered languages, the line between revival and death is extremely thin. Language is remarkably resilient, however. It is not just a tool for communicating, but also a powerful way of separating different groups, or of demonstrating group identity. Many indigenous communities have shown that it is possible to live in the modern world while reclaiming their unique identities through language.
1. Minority languages can be best preserved in ______.
A. an increasingly interconnected world
B. maintaining small numbers of speakers
C. relatively isolated language communities
D. following the tradition of the 20th century
2. According to Paragraph 2, that the world can maintain its linguistic diversity in the future is ______.
A. uncertain
B. unrealistic
C. foreseeable
D. definite
3. According to the author, bilingualism can help ______.
A. small languages become acceptable in work places
B. homogenize the world's languages and cultures
C. global languages reach home and community settings
D. speakers maintain their linguistic and cultural identity
4. Computer technology is helpful for preserving minority languages in that it ______.
A. makes learning a global language unnecessary
B. facilitates the learning and using of those languages
C. raises public awareness of saving those languages
D. makes it easier for linguists to study those languages
5. In the author's view, many endangered languages are ______.
A. remarkably well-kept in this modern world
B. exceptionally powerful tools of communication
C. quite possible to be revived instead of dying out
D. a unique way of bringing different groups together