Материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления пользователям Интернета и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав.
© 2018 - 2024
In English writing we seldom speak of tradition, though we occasionally apply its name in deploring its absence. We cannot refer to "the tradition" or to "a tradition;" at most, we employ the adjective in saying that the poetry of So-and-so is "traditional" or even "too traditional." Seldom, perhaps, does the word appear except in a phrase of censure. If otherwise, it is vaguely approbative, with the implication, as to the work approved, of some pleasing archaeological reconstruction. You can hardly make the word agreeable to English ears without this comfortable reference to the reassuring science of archaeology.
Certainly the word is not likely to appear in our appreciations of living or dead writers. Every nation, every race, has not only its own creative, but its own critical turn of mind; and is even more oblivious of the shortcomings and limitations of its critical habits than of those of its creative genius. We know, or think we know, from the enormous mass of critical writing that has appeared in the French language the critical method or habit of the French; we only conclude (we are such unconscious people) that the French are "more critical" than we, and sometimes even plume ourselves a little with the fact, as if the French were the less spontaneous. Perhaps they are; but we might remind ourselves that criticism is as inevitable as breathing, and that we should be none the worse for articulating what passes in our minds when we read a book and feel an emotion about it, for criticizing our own minds in their work of criticism. One of the facts that might come to light in this process is our tendency to insist, when we praise a poet, upon those aspects of his work in which he least resembles anyone else. In these aspects or parts of his work we pretend to find what is individual, what is the peculiar essence of the man. We dwell with satisfaction upon the poet's difference from his predecessors, especially his immediate predecessors; we endeavour to find something that can be isolated in order to be enjoyed. Whereas if we approach a poet without his prejudice we shall often find that not only the best, but the most individual parts of his work may be those in which the dead poets, his ancestors, assert their immortality most vigorously. And I do not mean the impressionable period of adolescence, but the period of full maturity.
Yet if the only form of tradition, of handing down, consisted in following the ways of the immediate generation before us in a blind or timid adherence to its successes, "tradition" should positively be discouraged. We have seen many such simple currents soon lost in the sand; and novelty is better than repetition. Tradition is a matter of much wider significance. It cannot be inherited, and if you want it you must obtain it by great labour. It involves, in the first place, the historical sense, which we may call nearly indispensable to anyone who would continue to be a poet beyond his twenty-fifth year; and the historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence; the historical sense compels a man to write not merely with his own generation in his bones, but with a feeling that the whole of the literature of Europe from Homer and within it the whole of the literature of his own country has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order. This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and of the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional. And it is at the same time what makes a writer most acutely conscious of his place in time, of his contemporaneity.
No poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone. His significance, his appreciation is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists. You cannot value him alone; you must set him, for contrast and comparison, among the dead. I mean this as a principle of aesthetic, not merely historical, criticism. The necessity that he shall conform, that he shall cohere, is not one-sided; what happens when a new work of art is created is something that happens simultaneously to all the works of an which preceded it. The existing monuments form an ideal order among themselves, which is modified by the introduction of the new (the really new) work of art among them.
3 . Answer the questions.
1. Do we, according to the author, often or seldom speak of tradition in English writing?
2. What adjective do we employ at most?
3. What word is not likely to appear in our appreciations of living or dead writers?
4. What turn of mind has every nation?
5. How do we know the critical method or habit of the French?
6. What might we remind ourselves?
7. What fact might come to light in the process of crimicism?
8. Is novelty better than repetition?
9. What is any poet’s appreciation?
10. What do the existing monuments form?
4. Match the words on the left with the definitions on the right.
1. tradition a) a judgment of the worth or facts of something
2. approve b) a person who held a position before someone else
3. appreciation c) the passing down of the beliefs, practices and customs
from the past to the present
4. oblivious d) which cannot be avoided or prevented from happening;
certain to happen
5. shortcoming e) to receive (property, a title, etc.) left by someone who has
died
6. inevitable f) not noticing; unware
7. predecessor g) a person from whom one is descended, esp. one who
lived a long time ago
8. ancestor h) happening or done at exactly the same time
9. inherit i) a fault; failing; defect
10.simultaneous j) to have a favourable opinion, esp. of a course of action of
type of behaviour; regard as good
5. Find antonyms to the following words in the text
1. often 6. tiny
2. presence 7. better
3. prose 8. loose (v)
4. including 9. similarity
5. alive 10. failure
6. Translate the following sentences from Russian into English
1. Поэт и литературный критик Т.С.Элиот – влиятельная фигура в английской критике 1920-1950-х годов.
2. При чтении статьи «Традиции и индивидуальный талант» необходимо учитывать, что для Элиота «традиция» и «порядок» не есть объективно существующий и посильно изучаемый процесс.
3. Это всегда и прежде всего устанавливаемый «порядок», то есть крайняя субъективность интерпретации.
4. Однако в настоящее время в английском, а также в американском литературоведении намечается исторически объективный подход к литературному и критическому наследию этого автора.
5. Несмотря на известную искусственность английского языка Джозефа Конрада, он оказал своим стилем, характером своей судьбы и самим типом своей личности формирующее влияние на многих видных английских, а также американских писателей.
7. Look through the text and suggest a headline.
The author's capital is his brain-power – power of invention, power of writing. The manufacturer's capital, in fortunate cases, is being continually reproduced and increased. Here is the first grand difference between the capital which is turned into calico and the brain capital which is turned into literature. The calico scarcely varies in appropriateness of quality, no consumer is in danger of getting too much of it, and neglecting his boots, hats, and flannel shirts in consequence. That there should be large quantities of the same sort in the calico manufacture is an advantage: the sameness is desirable, and nobody is likely to roll his person in so many folds of calico as to become a mere bale of cotton goods, and nullify his senses of hearing and touch, while his morbid passion for Manchester shirtings makes him still cry "More!" The wise manufacturer gets richer and richer, and the consumers he supplies have their real wants satisfied and no more.
Let it be taken as admitted that all legitimate social activity must be beneficial to others besides the agent. To write prose or verse as a private exercise and satisfaction is not social activity; nobody is culpable for this any more than for learning other people's verse by heart, if he does not neglect his proper business in consequence. If the exercise made him sillier or secretly more self-satisfied, that, to be sure, would be a roundabout way of injuring society; for though a certain mixture of silliness may lighten existence, we have at present more than enough. And bad literature of the sort called amusing is spiritual gin.
A writer capable of being popular can only escape this social culpability by first of all getting a profound sense that literature is good-for-nothing if it is not admirably good: he must detest bad literature too heartily to be indifferent about producing it if only other people don't detest it. And if he has this sign of the divine afflatus within him, he must make up his mind that he must not pursue authorship as a vocation with a trading determination to get rich by it. It is in the highest sense lawful for him to get as good a price as he honorably can for the best work he is capable of; but not for him to force or hurry his production, or even do over again what has already been done, either by himself or others, so as to render his work no real contribution, for the sake of bringing up his income to the fancy pitch. An author who would keep a pure and noble conscience, and with that a developing instead of degenerating intellect and taste, must cast out of his aims the aim to be rich. And therefore he must keep his expenditure low – he must make for himself no dire necessity to earn sums in order to pay bills.
In endeavoring to estimate a remarkable writer who aimed at more than temporary influence, we have first to consider what was his individual contribution to the spiritual wealth of mankind? Had he a new conception? Did he animate long-known but neglected truths with new vigor, and cast fresh light on their relation to other admitted truths? Did he impregnate any ideas with a fresh store of emotion, and in this way enlarge the area of moral sentiment? Did he, by a wise emphasis here, and a wise disregard there, give a more useful or beautiful proportion to aims or motives?
This is not the common or easy course to take in estimating a modern writer. It requires considerable knowledge of what he has himself done, as well as of what others had done before him, or what they were doing contemporaneously; it requires deliberate reflection as to the degree in which our own prejudices may hinder us from appreciating the intellectual or moral bearing of what on a first view offends us. An easier course is to notice some salient mistakes, and take them as decisive of the writer's incompetence; or to find out that something apparently much the same as what he has said in some connection not clearly ascertained had been said by somebody else, though without great effect, until this new effect of discrediting the other's originality had shown itself as an adequate final cause; or to pronounce from the point of view of individual taste that this writer for whom regard is claimed is repulsive, wearisome, not to be borne except by those dull persons who are of a different opinion.
8. Find the key words in each paragraph of the text and translate them into Russian.
9. Find the English equivalents of the following word combinations in the text and translate the sentences with them into Russian in writing.
1. мыслительные способности
2. превращать что-либо во что-либо
3. давайте допустим
4. выучить наизусть
5. окольный путь
6. прежде всего
7. принять решение
8. либо … либо
9. нацелиться на что-либо
10. а также
10. Give the summary of the text in Russian using the key words and word combinations from exercises 8 and 9.
11. Read the following text.
From “Principles of Literary Criticism”
1. On this false assumption it is easy to build up a formidable theory about art's concern with the basic elements of human nature and to arraign modern art for superficiality. But there have always been these two kinds, work with the wide, and work with only the special appeal. What actually are the differences between them?
2. The one, the art which keeps the child from play and the old man from his chimney-corner, evidently builds up its attitudes with the simplest, most aboriginal impulses, and it handles them so that the undeveloped mind can weave them into some sort of satisfying fabric while the more mature mind, qualifying and complicating them until they perhaps lose all likeness to their earlier form, still finds them serve its needs. The other is built up from impulses which, except in a personality capable of very nice adjustments, do not unite in any valuable way, and often the impulses themselves are of a kind of which only a highly developed mind or one with special experience is capable. This last point, however, is separable, and raises a question which will be discussed later.
3. Plainly each of the two methods has its advantages. The poet of wide appeal, it is tempting to suppose, has an advantage in that the impulses involved are general, have been interested all through life and are very representative of experience. And he has the further advantage perhaps of avoiding a certain dangerous finality. Impulses which adjust themselves at so many levels may go on doing so perhaps indefinitely. There may be something in the suggestion that Shakespeare wrote better than he knew. Certainly it is a serious charge against much of Henry James, for example, that when the reader has once successfully read it there is nothing further which he can do. He can only repeat his reading. There is often a point at which the parts of the experience click together, the required attitude is achieved, and no further development is possible. Together with this goes the sense in the reader that all had to be just as it is and not otherwise, whereas with much of Shakespeare we feel that anything might have been different and the result the same. "Not laboriously but luckily."
12. Combine the following sentences to make one complete statement. Make any changes you think necessary, but do not change the sense of the original. Refer to the passage when you have finished the exercise.
The other is built up from impulses. These impulses do not unite in any valuable way. The exception is a personality capable of very nice adjustments. The impulses themselves are often of some kind. They are of a kind of which only a highly developed mind is capable. Or a mind with special experience (paragraph 2).
13. Find sentences with: a) participle I and II; b) gerund. Analyse them and suggest different ways of their translation.
14. Translate the text in writing.
15. Before translating the text from Russian into English translate the following words.
1. picture (n), picture (v), picturedom, picture-goer, picturesque
2. thought (n), thoughtful, thoughtless, thoughtway
3. cruel, cruelly, cruelty
4. last (n), last (v), last (a), lastly, lasting, at last
5. arm (n), arm (v), army, armament, armed, armful
6. mean (v), mean (a), meaning, means, by means of
7. conscious (n), conscious (a), conscience, consciousness
8. ease, easily, easiness, easy, uneasy, easygoing, easy-to-use
9. captive, captivity, capture, captor, captured
10. build, rebuild, builder, building, rebuilding, build-in
16. Match word combinations on the left with the English equivalents on the right.
1. общественные отношения a) feeling a humanism and
solidarity
2. впервые b) social relationships
3. приходить к выводу c) to harm
4. чувство человечности и солидарности d) immediate understanding
5. идейное значение e) to make somebody act
6. мгновенное понимание f) to come to the conclusion
7. причинить зло, вред g) thanks to; owing to
8. заставить кого-либо действовать h) for the first time
9. благодаря i) in distinction from
10. в отличие от j) ideological
17. Translate the following sentences into English.
1. Писатель – и это для него характерно сегодня – оставляет своего героя на пороге самопознания и действия.
2. Даже в решительную минуту его герой еще далек от понимания того, что его ждет впереди.
3. Сам Силлитоу придает огромное значение борьбе за мир, так как чтобы творить, писателю нужен мир.
4. Силлитоу блестяще удается отрицание окружающей героя жизни, отрицание в изображении одиночества героев.
5. Может быть, именно поэтому наиболее спорен в романе его финал.
18. Translate the text in writing.
«Рабочий» роман
В романе «Ключ от двери» (“Key to the Door”) рисунок Силлитоу глубже и вдумчивее, картина, которую дает автор, шире и содержательнее. Герой произведения – старший брат Артура Ситона, Брайан – постепенно приходит к пониманию несправедливости современного английского строя, жестокости тех общественных отношений, над которыми Артур почти не задумывался. Наиболее содержательна последняя часть романа. Герой, завербовавшийся в английскую армию, попадает в Малайю и там начинает осознавать, что воюет за чуждые ему и его классу интересы. Именно в Малайе Брайан впервые осознает ту общность, которая существует между малайскими партизанами и ноттингамскими рабочими. Решение героя – «Я не буду больше рабом» – в финале романа позволяет говорить о сдвигах, происшедших в миропонимании самого Силлитоу. Брайан Ситон убеждается в том, что означает империализм на практике, и приходит к выводу: надо бороться. Он отпускает малайского патриота, в которого, как солдат британской армии, должен стрелять, потому что в нем пробуждается чувство человечности и солидарности.
Художественное и идейное значение романа – в превосходном изображении той медленной эволюции, которую претерпевает сознание простого английского юноши, присланного в чужую землю убивать таких же людей, как он сам. Силлитоу не приводит своего героя к мгновенному пониманию происходящего вокруг него. Брайан лишь постепенно находит «ключ от двери». Сама жизнь – нелегкая служба в джунглях, бессмысленное убийство людей, не причинивших ему никакого зла, – заставляет Ситона-старшего сначала задуматься, а затем и действовать.
Когда Брайан, посланный стрелять в партизан-коммунистов, отпускает пленного малайца, он делает это не только благодаря проснувшейся в нем человечности. Если он еще не знает до конца, как переустроить жизнь, то, в отличие от Артура, уже начинает искать пути к этой перестройке, перестает быть пассивным орудием в руках ведущих войну империалистов. В сознании Брайана созревает ощущение братства людей труда, каков бы ни был цвет их кожи.
19. Translate the following questions and give the answers in English.
1. Какой роман рассматривается в тексте?
2. К чему постепенно приходит герой произведения?
3. Что начинает Брайан осознавать, когда попадает в Малайю?
4. К какому решению приходит герой в финале романа?
5. Почему он отпускает малайского патриота?
6. В чем заключается художественное и идейное значение романа?
7. Находит ли Брайан «ключ от двери» мгновенно или постепенно?
8. Что заставляет Ситона – старшего действовать?
9. В чем отличие Брайана от Артура?
10. Что созревает в сознании Брайана?
20. Give the summary of the text in English.
Unit 11
Economy
1. Before you read, answer the following questions.
1. How rich is the Russian economy, compared with other times and other countries?
2. What problems do economists traditionally focus on?
3. What are the prospects of economic development in the twenty first century?
2. Read and translate the text.
Дата: 2019-04-23, просмотров: 234.