英语文章阅读

英语文章阅读 In 1975 a young director with no big films credits under his belt, set out to make a horror film. Steven Spielberg wanted his film filled with violent and gory shark attacks. He wanted us to watch as this massive animal, built to kill, would attack his unsuspecting prey. But there was a problem. The mechanical sharks that were supposed play a staring role in the film rarely worked as expected. As much as the young director wanted graphic shark attacks, he couldn't have them. Frustrated, the team found another solution. They left most of the violence to our imaginations. Viewers would see a fin, then someone would disappear under the water, and then the water would turn red. That's it. In other scenes, we wouldn't even see a fin, we'd see a yellow barrel surfing across the water, knowing that it was a shark, deep below, towing the rope attached to the barrel towards the next victim. The effect was so scary and so powerful, it influenced our entire society. Though people were of course aware of sharks prior, there was little thought given to them when they went to the beach. After Jaws, however, there was a significant increase in shark hysteria that remains to this day. The funny thing is that there are more people killed by dogs each year than have been killed by sharks since they started counting sharks attacks. The brilliant way in which Spielberg told the story of Jaws did not happen in a brainstorming session and it was certainly not planned. It was the solution he found when what he wanted wasn't possible. The malfunctioning robots forced him to find another solution. We have a false belief that innovation happens with lots of money and resources. In fact, the opposite is true. It is a lack of resources, it is a lack of money, it is after something goes wrong are we able to truly innovate - to truly re-imagine how something could work. This is why large companies rarely produce truly innovative products - because they have the money and resources to build anything they want. The problem is, the things they want aren't that innovative because they weren't hindered or forced to find new ways. Small businesses, in comparison, are where big ideas happen. Slim on money and resources, they figure out how to make something work with what they have. Then big businesses buy the small businesses for their big ideas. To be clear, Spielberg was also a student of film. Without his mechanical shark, he was able to defer(局限于) to his knowledge. He knew the techniques that Alfred Hitchcock used in his movies to build suspense - foreboding music, simple details and an view of the aftermath. The suspense, Spielberg knew, happened in our imaginations, not in our eyes. Though he knew this, he didn't need to tap that knowledge until he had to. And that's where having less produces more. There are plenty of smart people at large companies who don't tap their brilliance because they don't need to. They have all the resources they need. Smart entrepreneurs, in contrast, have no choice but to rely on their smarts and that's why they can run innovation circles around large companies every single day. Innovation is not born from the dream; innovation is born from the struggle. Innovation, at its core, is not simply about building the future; innovation is about solving problems in the present. And the best innovations, just like the shark in Jaws, is often something we don't even know is there. 1.What can we learn from the penultimate(倒数第二) paragraph of the passage? A.Spielberg was a student of Alfred Hitchcock and knew what he used in his movies to build suspense. B.That innovation happens with lots of money and resources is a flase belief. C.Compared to large companies,small companies have no choice but to rely on their own smart. D.Spielberg just often use the knowledge to manufactur the suspense happening in our imaginations. 2.What dose the underline word “hindered”in the fifth paragraph probably mean? A.devoted B.impeded C.rejecting D.succeeding 3.Which is the best title of the passage? A. How To Innovate Like A Shark B.A Film Called JAWS C. Innovation And Developing D.Protecting The Sharks 参考答案:C B A 解析:1. A斯皮尔伯格不是希区柯克的学生，原文说的是，是电影的学生。B不属于倒数第二段。C有原文对应。D不是often，原文中说，不到万不得已，不轻易使用。 2.A.献身的，忠诚的。B 阻碍的。C拒绝的，抛弃的。D随后的，以后的。 3.B太片面，全文不仅仅讲到电影。C没提到developing D没提到保护问题。 附参考译文: 1975年，一名从未执导过任何电影大片的年轻导演打算拍摄一部恐怖片。他的名字叫史蒂芬?斯皮尔伯格。斯皮尔伯格导演希望他的电影里面充满大量血腥暴力的鲨鱼攻击画面，让观众们看到生来杀戮的这个庞然大物攻击毫无防备的人们。但事与愿违，影片中担任重要角色的这些“机械鲨”总是与他想要达到的效果相差甚远。斯皮尔伯格想要展现生动的鲨鱼攻击画面，但无法做到。失望之余，导演组想到另一个:他们把大部分的暴力画面留给我们自己去想象。观众们会先看到一只鲨鱼背鳍，然后有人会消失在水下，接着水中泛红。这样恐怖的效果就达到了。在其他场景里，我们甚至连背鳍都看不到，只会看到一个黄色圆桶在水面上游弋，但我们知道水下正有一头鲨鱼拽着桶上的绳子冲向下一个受害者。这样的效果很有冲击力，相当恐怖，影响了我们当时整个一代人。 尽管这部影片之前人们就知道鲨鱼，但去沙滩的时候很少有人去联想。然而《大白鲨》一经播映，人们对鲨鱼的恐惧陡然升高，直到今天仍心有余悸。有趣的是， 从人们开始统计鲨鱼袭人事件起，每年因狗致死的人数要比被鲨鱼咬死的人多。 斯皮尔伯格讲述大白鲨的方式非常高明，这种方式不是在头脑风暴的过程中形成的，肯定不在之中。它是在斯皮尔伯格发现他想要的东西不可能实现的情况下才找到的方法。那些“笨拙”的机械鲨逼迫他想到这另一个方法。 我们有一个错误的观念:只有资金和资源都充裕才会有创意。但实际上，恰好相反。正是在没有资源，没有资金，原计划不尽人意的情况下，我们才会真正想到创新—真正重新构思可行的办法。这就是为什么大公司很少能制造出真正的创意产品—因为他们有足够的钱和资源去做任何他们想要的东西。但问题是，他们想出来的不是那么有创意，因为他们没有受到阻碍或被迫去想新的方法。相比之下，小公司往往有大创意。没有资金支持，没有可用的资源，他们被迫利用现有的资源来创造可行的方案。然后大公司从小公司手里买走这些好的创意。 进一步讲，斯皮尔伯格也是电影的学生。没有他的机械鲨，他仍会局限于学到的那些电影知识。他知道希区柯克如何在电影中制造悬疑—鬼魅的配乐，简单的情节以及对结局的回顾。他还知道，悬疑不在我们的眼中，而是在我们的想象中。但尽管如此，不到万不得已，他是不会用这些知识的。有时知道的少但能创造的多。大公司里有很多聪明人，但他们只在需要动脑的时候才会去思考。他们需要的所有资源都可信手拈来。但相比之下，小公司没有选择，只能靠自己思考，这就是为什么他们能让大公司每天围着他们要创意的原因。 创意不是从梦中诞生;创意出自于困境。本质上讲，创意不是简单地建设未来;创意是要解决现在的问题。最好的创意，就像电影里的大白鲨，只是我们不知道它就在那里。 ———— 文章摘自有道学堂。 Benny 2012.9.23