048 The study of history places too much emphasis

[DP8313]

48. "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."

 

Historical study is one of the evergreen and very much interesting topic of research since long time. In fact people are very much eager to know about historical events and trends. People always want to know about their ancestors, about their lifestyle, their physical structure and many other things related to them.

 

If we take much of the historical studies in to consideration, we can conclude that in those studies results are always related to few individuals. Most of the studies suggest one or other individual or group for any particular event or trend. Many of those, who had contributed in those particular events, have not been included in those studies. Study of facts behind construction of Pyramids is one of the many examples of this. In those studies they are pharos and some other individuals from royal family or from higher post in government who received all the credits for the construction of Pyramids while the groups of labors, who worked very hard for so many years, have not been given much emphasis for the great job done by them.

 

Another example of this is Napoleon who was awarded all the credit for winning so many battles but many soldiers of his army including those who are responsible for many tactics during the war could not secure a small place or little description about their feat. When people think about great warriors, they remember Napoleon but they didn’t even think about all other soldiers who were equally responsible for those great victories.

 

Such things are very common in historical studies as they are solely dependant upon the few evidences. Generally such evidences are in form of some coded documents, wall painting and other forms like that. Those things were prepared either by some tourists or by someone loyal to the king or some potent individual with good hold on government. In both cases only some very well known personalities were entitled to get attention in those documents. Books written by many Chinese tourists and students containing details of Greek, Roman and other culture are examples of it.

 

Thus from above discussion, we can conclude that study of history places too much emphasis of individuals because of lack of strong evidences containing details about groups of people other than famous few involved in many significant events and trends.

 

Plz review this topic.

 

ThanX

 

Divyesh

[Tania]

The topic is :-

48. "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."

 

here is my essay:

 

When India attained independence on 15th August 1947, Mahatma Gandhi was bestowed the title of Father of the Nation. Ordinary people called him Bapu, which means father. The supreme efforts of Mahatma Gandhi in the attainment of freedom can never be estimated. Yet,achievement of freedom would have been impossible without the sacrifices of the martyrs who adhered to Mahatma Gandhi's principles of satyagraha and non-violence. These brave people rare get their fae share of credit.Thus, history is replete with stories about the glorious deeds of a few individuals. These famous individuals would have been unable to succedin their daring endeavours without the support and active participation of their fellow members.

 

History immortalizes the memories of a few individuals, because it was their good fortune that they managed to consistently remain in the limelight. For instance, Winston Churchill was a very competent prime minister whose speeches gave courage to an entire nation. But, Britain would have been unable to defend itself without the sacrifices of the soldiers on the battle field. The efforts of Winston Churchill can never be undermined. But, it is apparent that the huge amount of publicity available to the prime minister would ensure the mention of the name Winston Churchill in history text books for years to come. But the battle of Britain would never have been won without the daring plans made by the Britiish service chiefs. Yet, these people who are behind the scenes never find any mention in history. Perhaps, this can be explained on the basis of the fact that like all the historically famous individuals, Winston Churchill had exemplary leadership skills. Leaders always get a huge share of the limelight. They give speeches and command rapt attention. Thus, they deserve to be immortalized by history. Hence, the emphaisi is individuals is due to the fact that these individuals had superior leadership skills which enabled them to lead the populace while continuosly staying in the limelight.

 

The most significant events in history were made possible by groups of people. Thus, it is unfair to give all the credit to the famous few. The efforts of one man are not sufficient to cause a paradgm shift in the well-being of humanity. It is the cumulative efforts of all the members of groups that have sparked revolutions. For instance, in Europe during the medieval period, feudalism was rife. Land was owned by a few superior lords who forced common people to work as bonded labour. It was the philosophers and painters that caused the renaissance. Several renaissance painters like Michaelangelo, Rembrandt, Rafael, Donatello and Leonardo da Vinci depicted the hardships of common people through their paintings. Yet, as of today, only Leonardo Da Vinci and Michaelangelo are world renowned. Similarly, during any discussion about the great names in physics, one may mention Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton. But, very few people would mention professors Bardain, Brattain and Schockley who invented the first semiconductor transistor. Without their invention, it would have been impossible for me to type this essay. Hence, the most famous events and trends in history were possible because of group effort.

 

Sometimes, it is worthwhile to mention exceptions wherein one person did indeed deserve all the credit. Against all odds, these people achieved their objectives. For instance, when Joan of Arc had visions of angels commanding that the Dauphin be made the king of France, . When a meeting with the Dauphin was arranged, it was done with great skepticism. Yet, Joan of Arc succeeded in the endeavour to free france from the cluthces of the English. Unfortunately, Joan of Arc became a martyr after being burnt alive at the stake . Thus, one cannot discount those occasions in one person rewrote history.

 

Most of the famour individuals are widely mentioned in history because of their superb leadership skills. Yet, when it really mattered, it was the group effort hta made the diference. Yet, there are a few exceptional cases where the individual reigned supreme

[nsoonhui]

Ths is my try

 

48. "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."

 

The study of history is very complicated and it's subjective. Everyone will have his or her own interpretations of the same facts. Thus this is why even though historical events are achieved by a group of people, nevertheless only a handful of individuals are remembered. The majority of contributors are simply buried by the river of time. I shall back up my thesis in following paragraphs.

 

The fact that history places too much emphasis on individuals is hardly debated. In history books, only some of the main players are mentioned, and other's contributions are simply trivialized, if not ignored. This may due to editor or writer's bias. In Malaysia, history books exaggerate the contribution of Malay race in obtaining independence for the nation. The role of other races like Chinese and India are downplayed and even dismissed sometimes. Even so history books chose only to emphasize the contribution of Thunku Abdul Rahman, the founding father of Malaysia. One who only reads history textbooks will be misled into thinking the independence was achieved by one man. This is because winners write history. The ruling party did this to ensure future generation will remember them alone as the valiant independence fighters. Those whose races and ideologies contradicted theirs nevertheless are intentionally left out of textbook's narration. This is a vivid example how political agenda has helped in distorting image of history.

 

Similar things also happened in Science. In the history of Science students are taught that Einstein alone was responsible for the foundation of Special Relativity. This is not quite so, Special Relativity's first suggested by Lorentz, Pioncare. What Einstein did was to put the whole theory on a firm, elegant and physical intuitive basis. The relativity idea was by no means Einstein's monopoly. Even after Einstein formed his theory after 1905, it was Mikowinsi who suggested Special Relativity in Geometrical form. Now modern physics textbooks presented Special Relativity in Mikowinsi's four dimensional geometrical form without giving much relativity's credits to him. So one can see that special relativity, one of the central pillars of physics was achieved by a group of physicists, instead of a single brilliant genius. The vex and lamentable fact is, today the world only knows Einstein; the other progenitors of the theory were simply forgotten.

 

It is clear that the historical study is often incomplete and one-sided, in the sense that it only recorded the achievement of some individuals and doesn't do justice to others. To get a fair picture of the history, one needs to read a wide variety of sources and forms a better judgment of oneself. This is how we came to realize the other side of the coin, and this is the best way to remember the forgotten protagonists who shaped our world.

[flyflycai]

 

To [/size]nsoonhui[/size]:

^_^ I¡¯d like to give some my points of view though they are probably not right. Hope we can discuss AWA frequently.

1. your style of writing is very smooth and native: the transition of sentences and paragraphs is very fluency. This is the very point I enjoy and admire.

2. However, I think there are some problems about your train of thought ( this is the most valuable point to discuss ). The second and third paragraphs are simply and similarly take examples to expound your standpoint, but you only cite to describe the existing phenomenon while without father illustration. You just explain it, as ¡°Everyone will have his or her own interpretations of the same facts¡±. I think it¡¯s better to write a additional paragraph to analyze the reasons.

3. your instances are very vivid and enrich. I wonder how can you remember so many instances. If it is possible, please give me more instances. Thanks!

 

*!* ^_^ *o* !o!

 

[nsoonhui]

To nsoonhui:

^_^ I¡¯d like to give some my points of view though they are probably not right. Hope we can discuss AWA frequently.

1. your style of writing is very smooth and native: the transition of sentences and paragraphs is very fluency. This is the very point I enjoy and admire.

2. However, I think there are some problems about your train of thought ( this is the most valuable point to discuss ). The second and third paragraphs are simply and similarly take examples to expound your standpoint, but you only cite to describe the existing phenomenon while without father illustration. You just explain it, as ¡°Everyone will have his or her own interpretations of the same facts¡±. I think it¡¯s better to write a additional paragraph to analyze the reasons.

3. your instances are very vivid and enrich. I wonder how can you remember so many instances. If it is possible, please give me more instances. Thanks!

 

*!* ^_^ *o* !o!

 

Thank you so much for your comments. However I don't quite understand your second point. Do you mean that I need to explain why the history books only emphasize certain individuals? As I read back I realise that my analysis is not trenchant enough. Thanks anway

[flyflycai]

to nsoonhui:

I think that it will be better if you could father analyse some reasons. You cite good example ,and after it, you could father analyse what is under these phenominen.

 

[Moizza]

Hi flyflycai,

 

I just wanted to point out a mistake you are continuously making. Its "further" not "father". Just wanted to rectify your mistake. Hope you won't mind it.

 

 

[flyflycai]

To Moizza:

Thanks!

[munni]

If u already taken ur GRE test! Can you pls spend a minute and tell me how much I can score on my essay.

 

Dear all!

 

I am taking my GRE test this month. If yo have some time can you pls

got through my essay and give me some suggestions. Thanks a

lot ...Munni

 

 

 

047 the study of history places

 

The speaker’s claim is 2 fold. 1) significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous individuals but by groups of people. 2) and that history places much emphasis on individuals but not on groups of people. study of history tells us many things. History records all the major events and trends without showing any bias whether they were made possible by famous individuals or groups of people. This makes obvious that study of history does not stress on either one .

 

History is fraught with many examples where major events were made possible by individuals.

 

Consider the case of Gandhi, father of India. He faught against the British to achieve Independence.

 

Though there were many great leaders struggled along with him he was the supreme and prominent among them. He organized and led many movements like Dandi march, swadesi movement to send back Britishers to their country. He inspired thousands of people through out the country with his speeches and virtues.

 

Under his leadership only India achieved independence . though many other leaders and thousands of people participated in these movements it was his ability to persuade ,encourage and organize people that made these movements successful.

 

 

Any significant event or trend was not made possible alone by the individual itself. But there should be someone to lead and maintain the groups of people to make the event successful. Without the leader the event will be a complete failure as there will be no one to guide them in right path. For example, Mother Teresa ,one of the greatest soul that has lived on earth worked for the poor , destitutes and orphans.

 

She established many several separate centers for old age people,orphans etc. she performed all these activities not alone by herself. Some gave the money,food clothes and some others volunteer themselves to do the work. But all these programmes are started and managed by herself only.

 

 

 

However some who concede with the speaker may point out that major events or trends can be made possible by groups of people. This can be mostly seen in scientific field and in politics. One example for this can be French revolution. It is achieved by any individual but all people unanimously worked to put end to the monarchal rule. In scientific fields most of the reaserches were done by group of scientists.

 

One example for this is :in discovering radium both madam curie and pierie curie worked together.

 

In sum , from the examples and points I conclude that history does not stress much emphasis on individuals alone and that significant events and trends were not only made possible by groups of people but also by famous few.

 

 

[tyro_writer]

I have not yet taken my GRE but still I am commenting on your essay.

Munni your essay is good in terms of ideas. but you have to properly arrange the paragraphs and the flow of essay. You are writing paragraphs of one line. One more thing you have mentioned dandi march etc about gandhi. but who will understand it. So do not mentioned such petty details. Try to mention something which the ETS writers will know. Also try to write some good conclusion. Your conclusion sounds weak.

 

Thanks,

Tyro

 

 

Originally posted by munni

 

If u already taken ur GRE test! Can you pls spend a minute and tell me how much I can score on my essay.

 

Dear all!

 

I am taking my GRE test this month. If yo have some time can you pls

got through my essay and give me some suggestions. Thanks a

lot ...Munni

 

 

 

047 the study of history places

 

The speaker’s claim is 2 fold. 1) significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous individuals but by groups of people. 2) and that history places much emphasis on individuals but not on groups of people. study of history tells us many things. History records all the major events and trends without showing any bias whether they were made possible by famous individuals or groups of people. This makes obvious that study of history does not stress on either one .

 

History is fraught with many examples where major events were made possible by individuals.

 

Consider the case of Gandhi, father of India. He faught against the British to achieve Independence.

 

Though there were many great leaders struggled along with him he was the supreme and prominent among them. He organized and led many movements like Dandi march, swadesi movement to send back Britishers to their country. He inspired thousands of people through out the country with his speeches and virtues.

 

Under his leadership only India achieved independence . though many other leaders and thousands of people participated in these movements it was his ability to persuade ,encourage and organize people that made these movements successful.

 

 

Any significant event or trend was not made possible alone by the individual itself. But there should be someone to lead and maintain the groups of people to make the event successful. Without the leader the event will be a complete failure as there will be no one to guide them in right path. For example, Mother Teresa ,one of the greatest soul that has lived on earth worked for the poor , destitutes and orphans.

 

She established many several separate centers for old age people,orphans etc. she performed all these activities not alone by herself. Some gave the money,food clothes and some others volunteer themselves to do the work. But all these programmes are started and managed by herself only.

 

 

 

However some who concede with the speaker may point out that major events or trends can be made possible by groups of people. This can be mostly seen in scientific field and in politics. One example for this can be French revolution. It is achieved by any individual but all people unanimously worked to put end to the monarchal rule. In scientific fields most of the reaserches were done by group of scientists.

 

One example for this is :in discovering radium both madam curie and pierie curie worked together.

 

In sum , from the examples and points I conclude that history does not stress much emphasis on individuals alone and that significant events and trends were not only made possible by groups of people but also by famous few.

 

 

[yaoyaochen1]

48. "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."

 

 

"History is a mirror", as one of the most famous emperor of china in Tang dynasty---Li Shimin once remarked, which chould reflect the flaws involved in the events happened before, and remind and prevent the present people from making the same mistake. Since a long time ago, Chinese have attached great importance to studying history, especially doing the research on several famous individuals, such as Li Zicheng, Qin Shihuang, etc, which have brought on the greatest revolution to this ancient nation. Similarly, this pattern of studying history prevails in almost every country, Americans do research on Washington, Russian do research on Stalin...... However, there is opposite voice which argues that the most significant events and trends in the history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long forgotten. Moreover these group of people also argued that the study of history now has placed too much emphasis on individuals. If it were up to me to determine which way to study history, I would like to contend that the critical people in history deserves more emphasis, and the several important facets I have taken into account is as follow.

 

 

Firstly, I would like to illustrate why there are some famous people in the history, because they are handsome, or because they have some strange habbits? Certainly not! It is because they had some crucial influences to that contemporary community, revolute the society, brought out on some dramatically high efficient technics, indoctrinated (instill)some important thoughts which have been widely accepted nowadays to the public belonged to that time. There is abundant examples, such as Shakespeare, the most brilliant writer and dramatist, had made many great works and left the most deepest influence on the literature.But how could this happen if no attention has payed to this genius? No one could deny the fact that only because the historian placed much emphasis on these significant people do we understand the momentous history events more clearly, and thus in turn make these people well-known.

 

 

Secondly, let us thought carefully of the reason that those people are forgotten, as the issue maintains, if they are the heroine or the hero in the "drama stage of history". Imagine there is a demonstration in our society to protest discrimination, who would be the most famous people in this event, an individual involved in this crowd or the leader? As a matter of fact, except for the leader, most members of the demonstration would remain in silence, however, the leader, who is in most cases the sponsor of this event, would be the critical role and be printed in the history.

 

 

Admitedly, every significant events and trends are not only the contribution of the very single people who are famed, but also the fruit of people whoever devote themselves into it. Such as Martin Luthor King, the illustrious chief of the movement to call for equal rights between the White and the Black, led many demonstrations and protests, but we have to admit that all the black people who was under the leading of King made their effort, and without these effort, no victory could be attain.

 

 

To sum up, taking all the aspects , pros and fons I mentioned above, into account, I could only conclude that those people who are involved in the significant events but have been forgetton by the public are the individuals that did not played the centrual and fateful role, although they make big contribution altogether, and I have to reiterate that it is those famous people who have made crucial influences derserve to be studied more carefully and thoroughly by the historians.

[atOmpLoyD]

Hi, yaoyaochen,

 

Let me try to give you some comments :)

 

Originally posted by yaoyaochen1

 

48. "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."

 

 

"History is a mirror", as one of the most famous emperor of china(China) in Tang dynasty---Li Shimin once remarked, which chould reflect the flaws involved in the events happened before, and remind and prevent the present people(present people?) from making the same mistake. Since a long time ago, Chinese have attached great importance to (the) studying (of) history, especially doing the research on several famous individuals, such as Li Zicheng, Qin Shihuang, etc, which have brought on the greatest revolution(revolutionary changes)to this ancient nation. Similarly, this pattern of studying (study of)history prevails in almost every country, Americans do research on Washington, Russian do research on Stalin...... However, there is opposite voice which argues that the most significant events and trends in the history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long (been) forgotten. Moreover these group of people also argued that the study of history now has placed too much emphasis on individuals. If it were up to me to determine which way to study history, I would like to contend that the critical people in history deserves more emphasis, and the several important facets I have taken into account is as follow.

(The first para too long?)

 

Firstly, I would like to illustrate why there are some famous people in the history, because they are handsome, or because they have some strange habbits? Certainly not! It is because they had some crucial influences to that contemporary community, revolute(past tense) the society, brought out on some dramatically high efficient technics, indoctrinated (instill)some important thoughts which have been widely accepted nowadays to the public belonged to that time. There is(are)abundant examples, such as Shakespeare, the most brilliant writer and dramatist, had made many great works and left the most deepest influence on the literature.But how could this happen if no attention has payed to this genius? No one could deny the fact that only because the historian placed much emphasis on these significant people do we understand the momentous history events more clearly, and thus in turn make these people well-known.

 

 

Secondly, let us thought(think/consider) carefully of the reason that(why) those people are forgotten, as the issue maintains(who have been forgotten? the famous few or groups of people behind those 'famous few', it sounds that you mean the latter), if they are the heroine or the hero in the "drama stage of history". Imagine there is a demonstration in our society to protest discrimination, who would be the most famous people in this event, an individual involved in this crowd or the leader? As a matter of fact, except for the leader, most members of the demonstration would remain in silence, however, the leader, who is in most cases the sponsor of this event, would be the critical role and be printed in the history.

I don't quite understand this para :(

 

Admitedly, every significant events and trends are not only the contribution of the very single people who are famed, but also the fruit of people whoever devote themselves into it. Such as Martin Luthor King, the illustrious chief of the movement to call for equal rights between the White and the Black, led many demonstrations and protests, but we have to admit that all the black people who was under the leading of King made their effort, and without these efforts, no victory could be attained.

 

 

To sum up, taking all the aspects , pros and fons(cons) I mentioned above, into account(bad structure), I could only conclude that those people who are involved in the significant events but have been forgetton by the public are the individuals that did not played the centrual and fateful role, although they make big contribution altogether, and I have to reiterate that it is those famous people who have made crucial influences derserve to be studied more carefully and thoroughly by the historians.

 

Honesty speaking I don't thing you've made yourself very clear. There seem to be lots of redundancy in your essay.

Just my opinion, hope it helps.

 

P.S. I think you used too many Chinese names. Maybe will make the evaluator dizzy?

[yaoyaochen1]

thank you atOmpLoyD, what you have said is very pertinent. I know that I have made many redundant explanations in order to pile up more words, but I really have some trouble in writing an issue, especially in expressing myself clearly.Anyway, thanks again. I will try my best.

My test is on March 18th

what about you?

[atOmpLoyD]

I've just finished my test today, it was really kooooool~~~

gonna relax a bit now :)

[yaoyaochen1]

atOmpLoyD, what about your test?

can you talk a bit more about your test?

You know, I feel really nervous about that nightmare. Do you have some material about issue which can do some help?

please tell me how to deal with it , pleeeeeeeeease! thank you a thousand times.!