I agree to some extent with my imaginary English reader. American literary historians are perhaps prone to view their own national scene too narrowly, mistaking prominence for uniqueness. They do over phrase their own literature, or certainly its minor figures. And Americans do swing from aggressive over phrase of their literature to an equally unfortunate, imitative deference. But then, the English themselves are somewhat insular in their literary appraisals. Moreover, in fields where they are not preeminent—e.g. in painting and music—they too alternate between boasting of native products and copying those of the Continent. How many English paintings try to look as though they were done in Paris; how many times have we read in articles that they really represent an "English tradition" after all.

邮政支局长在思考和处理问题时，把（）放在全局工作中来思考。

A.个人工作

B.支局工作

C.投递工作

D.业务发展