阅读《城市视觉污染》，完成题目。（12分）

①污染是城市公害之一, 主要包括大气污染、水体污染、噪音污染和视觉污染等。过去, 人们只对大气污染、水体污染和噪音污染进行了预防、治理和评介工作, 对视觉污染并未予以重视。

②所谓城市视觉污染, 是指城市建筑不美观、城市规划布局不合理、色彩不和谐、园林雕塑无美感、人的精神面貌不佳等现象通过视觉给人造成的不快, 从而对人的身心健康产生直接的影响和危害。

③城市不仅是人们为满足自身需要进行创造活动的物质环境, 而且也是人们为满足心理需要并具有审美要求的创造物。美观的城市建筑、合理的规划布局、和谐的色彩、典雅的园林雕塑艺术, 都会令人赏心悦目, 并使人们工作、学习的效率有所提高。反之, 就会给人们的视觉造成污染。例如, 有的城市住宅楼的门窗像调色盘一样颜色杂乱, 涂有广告的公共汽车不但过于刺眼, 而且给本来生活在大城市已感到烦躁的居民更增加了一重烦躁。心理学家认为, 色彩对人的思维、行为、举止、情绪、感觉和生理变化都有强烈的控制与调节作用。要是人们长期生活在色彩不和谐的环境中, 心情就会变得焦躁不安, 容易疲乏, 注意力不集中, 自控力差, 从而导致健康水平下降。这就是视觉污染给人带来的损失。

④黑格尔曾说过：“如果说音乐是流动的建筑, 那么建筑则是凝固的音乐。” 事实上, 城市建筑的美感, 确实能像音乐一般陶冶人的身心。从美学意义上讲, 城市园林雕塑是静的舞蹈、史的碑碣、生活的浓缩、理想的延伸。如果园林雕塑讲究艺术，会促使人去思考、奋进, 它的使用价值和经济效益都是很大的。反之, 则会造成不同程度的视觉污染, 影响人们的生活。总之, 如果城市建筑杂乱, 不美观, 必将使人产生不愉快, 长期这样, 必将对人的身心健康产生影响。这就是视觉污染带来的危害。

⑤城市总体规划布局所形成的形象面貌, 是人工环境与自然环境有机结合的连续展现, 这个展现是否和谐, 对人的视觉也有一定的影响。如巴西首都巴西利亚的城市总体规划布局就十分和谐、合理, 它有着瑰丽多姿的建筑和别具匠心的艺术构思, 是一座设计新颖、布局井然、设备完善和具有现代化交通设施的新型城市, 给人愉悦之惑。如果一座城市的规划布局不合理, 没有一个总体和谐的设计, 人工环境与自然环境不和谐, 那么, 人们长期生活在这种不和谐的环境中, 人们的身心健康将会受到直接影响, 这也是视觉污染带来的危害。

⑥在一个城市中, 居民精神面貌的好坏, 对人们的视觉也有一定的影响。像行为、仪表等, 都属这一范畴。如果人们的精神面貌不佳, 也将通过视觉给人带来不快, 从而给人的身心健康带来危害。因此, 我们要高度重视城市精神文明建设, 要在城市中营造一种清洁、安全、和睦的社会环境和树立良好的社会风气。

⑦综上所述, 对于城市视觉污染给人带来的影响, 我们不能掉以轻心, 应注意预防和治理,按“美的规律”建设城市,规划城市,力求使城市总体规划布局达到一种和谐的美。                                          

小题1:本文扣住城市视觉污染, 着重说明了一个什么问题?(2分 )

小题2:作者认为, 应预防和治理城市视觉污染, 并按“美的规律”来建设城市。从文章看, 应从哪些方面预防和治理视觉污染? 请概括说明。 (3 分 )

小题3:“这个展现是否和谐, 对人的视觉也有一定影响。”“居民精神面貌的好坏, 对人们的视觉也有一定的影响。”这两个句子都用了“一定”这个词, 在句中能否删去? 为什么?（4分）

小题4:“视觉污染”在我们的日常生活中是很多的。请从你的生活中, 举一个视觉污染的例子,并作简要说明。 (3 分 )

"Universal history, the history of what man has accomplished in this world, is at bottom the History of the Great Men who have worked here," wrote the Victorian stage Thomas Carlyle. Well, not any more it is not.

Suddenly, Britain looks to have fallen out with its favourite historical form. This could be no more than a passing literary craze, but it also points to a broader truth about how we now approach the past: less concerned with learning from forefathers and more interested in feeling their pain. Today, we want empathy, not inspiration.

From the earliest days of the Renaissance, the writing of history meant recounting the exemplary lives of great men. In 1337, Petrarch began work on his rambling writing De Viris Illustribus—On Famous Men, highlighting the virtus (or virtue) of classical heroes. Petrarch celebrated their greatness in conquering fortune and rising to the top. This was the biographical tradition which Niccolo Machiavelli turned on its head. In The Prince, the championed cunning, ruthlessness, and boldness, rather than virtue, mercy and justice, as the skills of successful leaders.

Over time, the attributes of greatness shifted. The Romantics commemorated the leading painters and authors of their day, stressing the uniqueness of the artist’s personal experience rather than public glory. By contrast, the Victorian author Samual Smiles wrote Self-Help as a catalogue of the worthy lives of engineers, industrialists and explores. "The valuable examples which they furnish of the power of self-help, if patient purpose, resolute working and steadfast integrity, issuing in the formulation of truly noble and many character, exhibit," wrote Smiles. "what it is in the power of each to accomplish for himself" His biographies of James Walt, Richard Arkwright and Josiah Wedgwood were held up as beacons to guide the working man through his difficult life.

This was all a bit bourgeois for Thomas Carlyle, who focused his biographies on the truly heroic lives of Martin Luther, Oliver Cromwell and Napoleon Bonaparte. These epochal figures represented lives hard to imitate, but to be acknowledged as possessing higher authority than mere mortals.

Communist Manifesto. For them, history did nothing, it possessed no immense wealth nor waged battles: "It is man, real, living man who does all that. "And history should be the story of the masses and their record of struggle. As such, it needed to appreciate the economic realities, the social contexts and power relations in which each epoch stood. For: "Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly found, given and transmitted from the past. "

This was the tradition which revolutionized our appreciation of the past. In place of Thomas Carlyle, Britain nurtured Christopher Hill, EP Thompson and Eric Hobsbawm. History from below stood alongside biographies of great men. Whole new realms of understanding—from gender to race to cultural studies—were opened up as scholars unpicked the multiplicity of lost societies. And it transformed public history too: downstairs became just as fascinating as upstairs.

41（）