wiki 百科美国文化 31页 - 副本

放映结束
点此返回首页
在大平原西部则有高耸的落基山脉，从南至北将美国大陆一分为二，在科罗拉多州的最高峰到达4270米。
在以前落基山脉还有频繁的火山活动；现在只剩下一个区域（怀俄明州黄石国家公园的超级火山—可能是
世界上最大的活火山）。
美国大部分地区属于大陆性气候，南部属亚热带气候。中北部平原温差很大，芝加哥1月平均气温-3℃，7
一个头戴星条高帽、蓄着山羊胡须的白发瘦Байду номын сангаас老
人。1961年美国国会通过决议，正式承认“山 姆大叔”为美国的象征。
国家象征
基本资料
• • • • • • • • • • 中文名称 英文名称 简 称 美利坚合众国 The United States of America 美国 北美洲 华盛顿 纽约、洛杉矶、旧金山、芝加哥、西雅图、亚特兰大等 7月4日（独立日） 星光灿烂的旗帜（The Star-Spangled Banner） USA 英语 • • • • • • • • • • 主要民族 主要宗教 国土面积 GDP总计 人均GDP 国际电话区号 国际域名缩写 道路通行 主要高等学府 人类发展指数 欧洲裔、拉丁美裔、非洲裔、亚裔等 新教、天主教、摩门教、犹太教 937.26万平方公里（一说：963万平方公里） 17.42万亿美元（2014年，国际汇率） 54644美元（2014年，国际汇率） 001 USA、US 靠右驾驶 哈佛大学，耶鲁大学等 0.914（第5名，极高，2014年）
美国文化
美国文化的主要内容是强调个人价值，追求民主自由，崇尚开拓和竞争，讲求理性和实用，其核心是个人中心主义：个人至 上、私欲至上、追求个人利益和个人享受，强调通过个人奋斗、个人自我设计，追求个人价值的最终实现。这种刻意塑造自我， 追求个性化的个人主义有其积极的一面，也有消极的一面。它调动了个人的积极性，使许多人的智慧和潜力得以充分发挥，从而 促进整个民族与国家的振兴和发展。然而，人人以自我为中心，人际关系就难以融洽，整个社会也会缺乏凝聚力。 美国公众注重成就，仰慕英雄，有深厚的成就崇拜和英雄崇拜的心理积淀。个人成就是所有美国人价值观中评价最高的价值 之一。美国人有很强的成就（或成功）意识。成功是所有美国人的追求，是诱人的前景，前进的动力。他们坚信，一个人的价值 就等于他在事业上的成就。一些事业有成的企业家、科学家、艺术家和各类明星，成了新时代的英雄。他们个人奋斗的过程和结 果，成了社会文化价值取向的参照系，父母教育子女的活教材。 美国是流动性很大的社会。这种流动体现在两个方面：地域性流动和社会性流动。美国相对的开放自由、发达的交通和冒险 好动的传统使许多美国人从乡村流到城市，又从市中心流向郊区；从北方流到南方阳光地带，从一个城市流到另一个城市。美国 社会阶级不像欧洲国家那样固定，加上公共教育的普及，使沿着社会阶梯向上流动成为可能。许多生活在美国的人，无论是土生 土长的美国人，还是漂洋过海来到美国的外国移民，都有一个梦，即通过自己的努力，改变自己的社会地位，实现自己的人生梦 想，这就是人们常津津乐道的“美国梦”。

•
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
•
A mighty woman with a torch whose flame
•
Is imprisoned lightning, and her name
•
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand

拉什莫尔山,俗称总统山 Mount Rushmore

Congress of the United States
Washington Monument

美国大选反映了美国的民主 文化

74°02'40.41W
Statue of Liberty 自由女神像
自由女神像，又称“自由照耀 世界,是法国赠送给美国独立 100周年礼物，位於美国纽约 市自由岛上。 The statue of liberty which is also called Liberty Enlightening the World is a gift given to the United States by France in honored of 100 anniversary of American independence, standing on Liberty Island in New York .
• 无论我们见过与否，毫无疑问地，它 是美国众多画作中唯一的一个成为文 化标签的。其主要原因是，画中农民 夫妻二人的表情深刻的体现了美国人 民的民族精神----勇于探索，坚强不 屈！
•
Buffalo Nickel
Buffalo Nickel
• It is designed by American famous artist James Fraser in 1911,which became a kind of coin between 1913 and 1938.The paintings on American traditional coin is mainly all previous president.But Buffalo Nickel didn’follow,it print two images which was close to extinguish in American-----Westward movement to commemorate

第2页/共76页
美国国名的由来
• 西班牙和葡萄牙占据了中、南美洲大部分地区，而英国则在北美建立了13个殖民地，称为“北美13洲联合 殖民地”。
• 在这些殖民地区，特别是在东北部，资本主义经济迅速发展，但却受到宗主国百般限制和压迫，因此英国 政府和殖民地的矛盾日益激化。
第3页/共76页
美国国名的由来
第44页/共76页
1607年4月，三艘装有102名移民的船横渡大西 洋
第45页/共76页
由五月花号上的英国清教徒在马萨诸塞海滨兴建的 普茨茅斯定居点
第46页/共76页
詹姆士敦是1607年英国人在北美弗吉尼亚建立的 第一个永久性居留地
第47页/共76页
弗吉尼亚殖民地的一个印第安人的村庄
第48页/共76页
• 印第安人是美国大陆最古老的居民。15世纪末，北美的印第安人约有100万，分别属于不同语言、不同文 化和习俗的部族与部落。美国每个州都有印第安人，南达科他州、俄克拉何马州、亚利桑那州和阿拉斯加 州等州的印第安人在这些州的人口比例超过5％，新墨西哥州印第安人占该州总人口的8％。
第55页/共76页
爱斯基摩人
第16页/共76页
美国国徽
第17页/共76页
美国国徽
• 国徽是一个国家的主要象征之一。只有特定的国家重要文件才 能盖上国徽大印，正式生效。
• 美国国徽的图案是：外围为两个同心圆，内有一只美国秃鹰雄 踞中央，双翼展开，右爪握一束橄榄枝，左爪握13支利箭，尖 嘴中叼着一条飘带，上书“合众为一”。秃鹰的胸前是一枚盾 形纹章，纹章上部是蓝色横纹，下部是红白相间的竖纹，象征 美国国旗。秃鹰的上方是蓝色天空中13颗星，四周光芒万道， 环绕着云朵组成的图案。
第18页/共76页

The spirit of liberty
The statue of Liberty stands not only for the most
important event in the US history, the war of Independence, but also for the nation’s quest for the spirit of Liberty .
The White House introduction 白宫简介
The White House is the President and the office of places. In 1812 the British and American war, the British army took over after HuaChengDuCheng, set fire to the Capitol building and the presidential palace, including the United States such as buildings. Later, in order to cover up the trace of burned in 1814, the President's house of palm red stone walls painted white. From then on, people call it "the White House". 白宫是总统和政府办公的场所,1812年英国和美国发生战争， 英国军队占领了华盛顿城后，放火烧了包括美国国会大厦和 总统府之类的建筑物。过后，为了掩盖被大火烧过的痕迹， 1814年总统住宅棕红色的石头墙被涂上了白色。从那以后， 人们就把它称为“白宫”。

美国文化美国文化美国各州有哪些有意思的习俗？ (2)美国各州的比较 (9)美国各州有哪些有意思的习俗美国各州有哪些有意思的习俗？？美国作为一个heterogeneous 的移民国家，相对来说各个族裔的融合度比较高，“普世价值”称霸主流文化；相对其他homogeneous 的民族国家，“习俗”这种概念并不常见。

题主所指可能是生活习惯上的差异，aka.｢独特的地方｣。

根据地区差异(Regional variations)，美国分为如下几个地区：新英格兰地区(New England)，中大西洋地区(the Mid-Atlantic states)，南部地区(the Southern United States)，中西部地区(the Midwestern United States)，西海岸地区(the Western United States)。

其中西海岸地区还可以分为太平洋沿岸各州(Pacific States)和山地各州(the Mountain States)。

国内的文化差异主要是区域差异，但区域内部的文化和生活习惯大致相同（就好像中国分为东北、华北、西北、华南、东南、西南等区域）。

1、“圣经带圣经带””(Bible Belt)：指的是美国东南及中南部各州，包括德克萨斯、俄克拉荷马、路易斯安那、阿肯色、田纳西、密西西比、肯塔基、亚拉巴马、佐治亚、南卡罗来纳、北卡罗来纳等黑人比例较高的州。

由于该地区有大量的福音派新教徒，民风非常保守，对宗教十分狂热，日常行事都要以圣经作为基本准则，去教堂做礼拜的人数比例(church attendance)要远远高于美国其它地区。

在美剧TBBT(生活大爆炸)中，Sheldon 就因为来自保守的南方Texas 而常被大家取笑他家乡和他妈妈的生活习惯。

（上图为2000年美国主要教堂的数量与分布，下方图例从左至右依次为Baptist浸信会-1302座，Catholic天主教-1164座，Christian基督教-72座，Latter-Day Saints末世圣徒教-80座，Lutheran路德教-250座，Mennonite门诺派-10座，Methodist卫理公会-219座，Reformed改革派-9座，其它-35座）2、每年3月17日的爱尔兰节日圣帕特里克节(St.Patrick's Day)，芝加哥市内的芝加哥河都会被染成绿色，纽约的第五大道也会举行大游行，全国各地的人们也都会穿上至少一件绿色的衣服、裤子、鞋子、包甚至帽子= =。

了解美国---美国文化背景简介【熔炉】(The Melting Pot)美国的别称。

因为美国是一个由来自世界各地不同民族的移民融合组成的国度。

这些移民说的英语不像英国人的英语那样具有较强的阶层性与地域多样性。

他们形成了相似的生活习惯与礼节；城乡居民的差别也不像其他国家的那样明显。

美国社会虽然竞争性强，且存在着种族歧视，但它在同化来自不同民族的移民方面又表现出相当大的弹性与包容性。

因而，形成了全新的整体文化与共同的民族意识，使美国成为“一个多民族组成的国家”。

美国人的人生观是基于个人奋斗、自我管束与竞争精神之上的。

【雅皮士与雅非士】(Yuppies and Yuffies)雅皮士是美国人根据嬉皮士(Hippies)仿造的一个新词，意思是“年轻的都市专业工作者”。

雅皮士从事那些需要受过高等教育才能胜任的职业，如律师、医生、建筑师、计算机程序员、工商管理人员等。

他们的年薪很高。

雅皮士们事业上十分成功，踌躇满志，恃才傲物，过着奢侈豪华的生活。

与嬉皮士们不同，雅皮士们没有颓废情绪，不关心政治与社会问题，只关心赚钱，追求舒适的生活。

雅非士意为“都市中失败的年轻人”。

他们虽然觉得自己的生活无法与雅皮士的生活相比，但又不愿意有失落感，并发誓要找到自己的归宿。

【山姆大叔】(Uncle Sam)它是美国的绰号与象征。

山姆大叔的英文为Uncle Sam，缩写是U.S.，正好与美国的英文缩写相同。

但它怎样成为美国的绰号和象征的呢?普遍的说法是：1812年，美英战争期间，美国特罗城有一个专门供应军用牛肉的商人(也有的说是军事订货的官员)名叫山姆尔〃威尔逊(Samuel Wilson,1776—1854)，人们平时都叫他山姆大叔(Uncle Sam)。

美国政府收购他的牛肉箱上都盖U.S.字样。

人们遂开玩笑说这些盖有U.S.字样的箱子都是山姆大叔的。

后来“山姆大叔”便成了美国的绰号。

19世纪30年代，美国画家又将“山姆大叔”画成一个留有山羊胡子的瘦长老人，帽子和裤子都有星条旗的标志。

• 百老汇歌舞剧
Broadway musicals
Hollywood
The film plays an important role in the cultural history of the United States.
• 美国人在默片时代中, 首先把电影当作一 种艺术表达形式. 从那时开始, 电影成了 一种为全世界千百万人提供的最佳娱乐. 从默片时代开始, 电影演员就一直是国际 间的名人, 而卓别林更是世界上最早最有 名的电影明星之一.
NBA 通过NBA，世界才知道
篮球原来可以这样打！
NBA is composed of " National Basketball Association (NBA )“, is a fierce competition. Degree and level is recognized as the most in the world
一座座y Awards
格莱美 Music feast
Disney DreamWorks
Let more young generation starts to like the United States of America
them
NBA是由美国“ 全国篮球协会（ NBA）”创办的 比赛，激烈的竞 争。 被确认为世界上 最高的程度和水 平
旧金山的金门大桥其跨度令人赞叹，它是美国建筑文 化的代表
New York Times Square
Times square each year to provide10% jobs in New York
纽约时代广场
New Year Carnival into a new year's Eve Times Square tradition 新年狂欢变成了除夕夜时代广场的传统活动

64.7% 16.0% 12.9% 4.6%
2050 74.0%
46.3% 30.2% 13.0% 7.8%
85%/1960
Flag


Stars = the 50 States Stripes = the 13 colonies
Five famous symbols of American culture
American Civil War

The American Civil War (1861–1865), also known as the War Between the States Eleven Southern slave states formed the Confederate States of America, also known as "the Confederacy." Led by Jefferson Davis, the Confederacy fought against the United States (the Union)
U.S. Census Bureau Population projections
Race/ethnicity Whites
Non-Hispanic Whites Hispanics/Latinos (of any race) African Americans Asian Americans
2010 79.5%

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The White House The White House 白宫 白宫
The White House introduction 白宫简介
• America's White House President and government offices. 1812 British and American war, British troops occupied fire Washington, including congress and the presidential palace this architecture. Later, in order to cover up passion, traces of the President's house in 1814, palm red stone walls is painted white. Since then, people call it "the White House". • 美国的白宫总统和政府办公地点。 美国的白宫总统和政府办公地点。 • 1812年英国和美国的战争中 英国军队占领火华盛顿 包括国会 年英国和美国的战争中,英国军队占领火华盛顿 年英国和美国的战争中 英国军队占领火华盛顿,包括国会 及总统府这种建筑。后来,为了掩饰激情 为了掩饰激情,1814年总统家的痕迹 年总统家的痕迹, 及总统府这种建筑。后来 为了掩饰激情 年总统家的痕迹 棕红色石头墙被漆成了白色。从那时起,人们称之为 白宫” 人们称之为“ 棕红色石头墙被漆成了白色。从那时起 人们称之为“白宫”。
American culture 美国文化
国歌： 国歌： 星条旗永不落 国鸟： 白头海雕（秃鹰） 国鸟： 白头海雕（秃鹰） 国花： 国花： 玫瑰花 所属洲： 所属洲： 北美洲 国庆日： 国庆日： 1776年7月4日 政体： 政体： 总统制共和制 执政党： 执政党： 民主党 现任领导人： 巴拉克·奥巴马 现任领导人： 面积： 面积： 9,629,091平方公 里 人口： 人口： 301,610,970人 年统计） （2007年统计） 主要宗教： 主要宗教： 天主教 基督新教 常用语言： 常用语言： 英语 官方语言： 官方语言： 英语

从政治上讲，这种宽容性表现在对自由的追求和对自由权利的维护。 从宗教上说，它体现在不同信仰的和谐共存。从生活范围上看，它 显现在不同和族、不同族裔社区的平安相处。一言以蔽之，在美国， 每个人基本上可以任意选择不同的观念、信仰、生活方式和传统习 惯；人们也可以在相当程度上保持自己的习俗和仪。譬如，犹太人 可以庆祝他们的宗教节日，而基督教徒则能够他们的圣诞节和复活 节。再譬如，美国华人可以在唐人街用华语生活和工作；同样的道 理，越南移民能够在他们的“小西贡”按越南的方式经营业务，从 事各种活动。
从一定程度上讲，个人进步的衡量标准之一是看一个人的职位升迁，因为常识 告诉人们，任何一个单位，凡奉行任人唯贤精神的，只有那些有才能、工作成绩出 色的人，才可能经常得到提拔晋升。鉴于这个原因，美国人对获取一份好工作―― 一份时常能带来机遇的工作，十分重视。受聘之前，他们多方打听，仔细调查，尽 量设法确信那份工作对自己有利。一旦发现工作环境不利，美国人会毫不犹豫地改 换门庭，另谋他职，即“跳槽”（job-hopping），因为大多数美国人都遵守此则行事， 离职对于他们决非什么不体面的事情；相反，它睦作追求个人进步的一种象征，被 看作寻觅升迁机会的一种努力。
宽容性
美国是个移民之国，它的祖先来自于全球各地。人们移居美国 时，不仅仅在地理位置上挪动一下，而且还把他们所在国的评议和 风俗习惯带到了新的居住地。因为杂，人们各自的差异十分突出； 因为差异十分普遍，人们就不特别注重统一性。久而久之，美国人 的文化习俗中形成了较高程度的宽容性（tolerance），对异质文化 和不同评议持容忍、可接受的态度。在这一点上，美国社会里可行 的习俗要比世界上其他国家来得宽泛。
白头海雕是美国国鸟，它走上了美国国徽
帝 国 大 厦 是 纽 约 人 的 骄 傲

The evolution of Uncle Sam
• Legend says Sam Wilson was a meat packer in New York, who supplied rations for the soldiers. They had to stamp their contractors name and where the rations were coming from, onto the food they were sending. On the package, it was labeled “E.A – US.” When someone asked what that stood for, a coworker joked and said “Elbert Anderson (the contractor) and Uncle Sam,” referring to Sam Wilson, though it actually stood for United States. As early as 1835 Brother Jonathan made a reference to Uncle Sam implying that they symbolized different things: Brother Jonathan was the country itself while Uncle Sam was the government and its power.
• However, even with the effective abandonment of Brother Jonathan (ie Johnny Reb) near the end of the Civil War, Uncle Sam didn't get a standard appearance until the well-known "recruitment" image of Uncle Sam was created by James Montgomery Flagg. It was this image more than any other that set the appearance of Uncle Sam as the elderly man with white hair and a goatee wearing a top hat with red and white stripes and white stars on a blue band, and red and white striped trousers.

中文维基百科中文维基百科是维基百科协作计划的中文版本，自2002年10月24日正式成立，由非营利组织──维基媒体基金会负责维持，截至2010年6月30日14:47，中文维基百科已拥有314,167条条目，累计编辑次数达13,708,705次。

此外还设有其他独立运作的中文方言或版本，包括闽南语维基百科、粤语维基百科、文言文维基百科、吴语维基百科、闽东语维基百科、赣语维基百科及客家语维基百科等。

名称来源在这个网站启用时，仅以“中文Wikipedia”为名。

直到2003年10月21日，Wikipedia的中文名，经过13人投票，命名为“维基百科”。

首先“维基”二字符合中国大陆的译名标准，另外“维”字意为系物的大绳，也做网解释，可以引申为因特网，“基”是事物的根本，或是建筑物的底部。

“维基百科”合起来可引申为因特网中装载人类基础知识的百科全书。

中文维基百科的副题是“海纳百川，有容乃大”。

这是中国清朝大臣林则徐（1785年——1850年）于1839年为广州越华书院所创作的对联的上联，下联原为“壁立千仞，无欲则刚” 。

“海纳百川”语出《管子·形势解》，意指海洋之所以广大，是因为它不分你我地容纳了数以百计的河流。

“有容乃大”则语出《尚书·周书·君陈》。

对联的上联勉励待人接物应仿效海洋，以宽大的胸襟和宽容的态度去接纳不同的人事地物。

这同时也配合了维基百科自由开放的宗旨。

主要特点中文维基百科正如维基百科本身，有三个引人注意的特点。

正是这些特点使中文维基百科与传统的中文百科全书有所区别：首先，中文维基百科将自己定位为一个包含人类所有知识领域的百科全书，而不是一本词典、在线的论坛或其他任何东西。

其次，计划本身是一个wiki，这允许了大众的广泛参与。

中文维基百科是第一个使用wiki系统进行百科全书编撰工作的中文协作计划。

还有一个重要的特点，那就是中文维基百科是一部内容开放的百科全书。

内容开放的材料允许任何第三方不受限制地复制、修改及再发布材料的任何部分或全部。

AfterwordGrowing up on the Great Plains, I learned my history in scattered patches. There was a photograph of an antique threshing machine hanging on Grandfather‟s wall. There was prime-time television, which for a while was devoted to stories of cattle drives and cow towns. My parents took me to notorious Dodge City where gunfighters were buried with their boots on and to Pawnee Rock where wary Indians watched the white man‟s caravans moving down the Santa Fe Trail. Later I found in books a more coherent but no more critical saga of frontier settlement: the coming of railroads, homesteaders, and winter wheat. Nobody, however, ever explained the significance of grass.It took me a while to discover that the Great Plains were by nature a grassland. They had been so for millions of years—one of nature‟s winning designs. Evolution had equipped the grasses to survive all but the most prolonged droughts. Above ground they might look scraggly and dead, but underground they maintained tangled, deep-reaching, perennial root systems with remarkable recovery potential. For resilience in the face of natural adversity nothing matched the grasses. Before the coming of the steel plow all other forms of life depended on this resilience; it was the grasses that made ecological community possible.Seeing my region‟s history from a grassy point of view came only after I had left home, left Kansas, and even wandered outside the normal boundaries of the discipline of history. I learned from ecologists like Paul Sears, Rachel Carson, and Aldo Leopold. Captivated by their visionary knowledge, I undertook to write my first book on the history of ecology in Britain and the United States.1 During that project I discovered notonly the Dust Bowl, which had almost never figured in the stories I had been told as a child, but also that some of the world‟s pioneering ecologists had lived on the Great Plains and studied native prairies even before the white man finished plowing them up. In the minds of farmers, there was “nothing here but grass.” But for scientists, what was “here” was a remarkable story in the evolution of life on the planet—a history of ecological interdependence and complexity.Evolution was a dirty word where I grew up. It is still a forbidden word, still associated with the infidel Charles Darwin, whose science is not accepted as valid by many plains people almost a century and a half after its first publication. Indeed, among a large portion of the citizenry all those infamous “e” words—evolution, ecology, and environment--are spoken with a sneer or a whisper. They are regarded as part of some pagan doctrine that devout minds must relentlessly oppose. But how could anyone truly understand the grasses or the deeper history of the Great Plains without acknowledging ecology, evolution, and Darwinian biology?If growing up on the Plains left me ignorant about the natural realities of the region, it also left me ignorant about another “e” word: economy. To be sure, we constantly talked about economic topics in my youth --making a living, exploiting one‟s opportunities, accumulating wealth. But few of us ever gained a truly systematic, comprehensive, or critical understanding of the economic system in which we were embedded. We were as naïve about economic as about ecological complexity.God, we knew, had put us here to subdue the earth. He had given us one of the toughest assignments in His created universe, but we knew that we were up to the job of turning dreary wasteland into gritty profit and did not require any further instruction.Leaving home and getting a formal education at a renowned graduate school, unfortunately, did not altogether remedy my shallow understanding of the past. Up until a few decades ago most professional historians were not well schooled in either ecology or economics, and they seldom thought about their interaction. What they commonly taught about economics was partial and unsystematic. Being on the whole “progressives” in politics, they understood that “business” had made p ossible an enormous increase in national wealth along with intensified social costs, dislocation, and injustice. Assiduously they had combed through archives to tell the history of challenges to America‟s business civilization, the history of various refo rm movements. They had written plenty on the politics of regulation and control. But the parallel workings of that economic system in environmental terms—the story of human relationships with the natural world in contrast to relationships within society—had received little attention.Here again I had to wander away on my own to find the writings of great economic thinkers like Adam Smith, Karl Marx, or Max Weber, who could offer a more comprehensive understanding. This book opens with a bit of bravado--a quotation from Karl Marx on soil exploitation and capitalism. It was like opening a fundamentalist Sunday school class with a quotation from Charles Darwin! But I intended more than shock. Just as Darwin remains the single most important student of how the biological world works and changes over time, so Marx endures as our most profound analyst of how capitalism functions.I never intended, however, to offer a “Marxist” interpretation of Great Plains history, for after all Marx missed quite a few things and turned out to be a bad prophet. He tried to force history into a rigid framework of “dialectics” and class struggle. He ignored themoral and philosophical vision behind capitalism (a failure that Weber helped remedy). Above all he did not fully anticipate the ecological point of view that would emerge out of Darwinism. He came too early for that and was too absorbed in the plight of Europe‟s industrial workers to appreciate the massive environmental impact of the modern global economy. I found in Marx a flawed if profound economic analysis, and was left with the task of how one might integrate economic analysis into a new ecological sense of history.Achieving that integration was the purpose behind this book. Such a mission undoubtedly required a much longer work than this one is. I should have discussed more fully the natural science of grasslands—not only ecology, but climatology, soil physics, environmental geology, and hydrology--while at the same time giving a more thorough account of markets, technologies, and risk and investment strategies that had come to the prairies in the period immediately prior to the 1930s. Because of time constraints on a beginning professor‟s life, the book could not offer the full-blown synthesis that I sensed was required to start historians down a new path.This book did succeed in laying out a provocative (and, apparently for a few more hostile reviewers, a provoking) hypothesis that the causes of the Dust Bowl lay in economic invasion and destruction of grasslands. It did raise relatively new questions about how the modern market economy brought unprecedented environmental transformation, how it taught a new set of values toward the natural world, and how it not only deliberately risked capital for gain but also risked an already shaky ecological stability for short-term private advantage.2I was not alone in searching for a new history that would integrate the various “e” words. From this book and others such a history has emerged, an ambitious field ofstudy that we call “environmental history.” Far more than a mere sub-discipline, environmental history radically shifts our perspective to see the past as a constantly shifting relationship between people and the natural world, with immense social ramifications. Environmental history tells stories of how people have interacted with nature over time. By now the new history has worked its way into universities throughout the world, from Sweden to India to Panama, and my domestic and international colleagues are writing some of the most vital and path-breaking books of our time.As it has attracted a more diverse array of talent and imagination, environmental history has changed, as all fields inevitably do. Some of the change has been positive, some not so positive. Under pressure from social historians, with their procrustean demand that every past event be reduced to terms of ethnicity, class, and gender, environmental historians have responded by focusing more and more on cultural differences within society‟s environmental attitudes rather than on economic and ecological externalities and commonalties. Recently many scholars have become preoccupied with who defined what nature meant or whose environmental problems got noticed. Questions of social ju stice have tended to overshadow questions of our species‟ treatment of the earth. To a point, this has been good for environmental history, bringing us down from overly broad generalizations and abstractions about the causes of change while expanding our moral awareness.While writing about the Dust Bowl, I was aware of those social differences despite what might seem to be a very homogeneous population on the plains. Women and men, Hispanics and Anglos, Mennonites and other religious groups were all part of prairie life in the 1930s, creating a cultural mosaic that must be understood as a key part of theequation. All those groups faced the same tragedy, but it could affect them differently. Their different attitudes and their different positions within society could determine whether they left or stayed, whether they experienced the tragedy as farmers or as cowhands, as tenants or landowners, whether they had to fight blowing dust indoors or outdoors. The dirty thirties did not have the same outcome for everyone.Although few African Americans ever lived in the region‟s rural countryside, it was they who gave observers a name to apply to those who fled in poverty and desperation—one of the book‟s most important, if unwitting, paradoxes. A newspaper or two called the refugees of the 1930s “exodusters, ” probably not realizing where the name originated. Where the original “exodusters” had been former slaves leaving the South for prairie homesteads, in a spirit of hope, the new exodusters were overwhelmingly whites who had lost out on the prairie and were looking for a new promised land, farther west where no dust storms raged.3But focusing over much on racial and cultural matters can distract from the larger vision of environmental history. We must never again lose sight of the land itself, of its moral and material significance, its agency and influence; the land must stand at the core of the new history. Nor should we overlook or dismiss the truth claims of the natural sciences, out of misguided deconstructionism or multiculturalism that makes nature whatever any group says it is, for science is our indispensable ally in understanding the past in a fuller and more authoritative light. Nor, in writing the cultural history of ideas about nature, should we obscure the age-old dialogue between ecology and economy. I put that dialogue front and center in this book, for without it there is no new perspectiveon history—there is only an old history of human ideas, perceptions, and values colliding with other ideas.On the Great Plains of North America, this book argues, one of the modern world‟s defining clashes between ecology and economics occurred. It is still going on and will likely go on for a long while; in fact, such clashes may be said to be at the core of all human history. Twenty-five years after publication, what is the state of that clash in the old Dust Bowl, and what additional lessons can we learn from the recent past?The good news since 1979 is that grass, with the help of the federal government, has made a partial comeback. Six years after this book‟s publication, as a new round of erosion was threatening, Congress, in the Food Security Act, established a Conservation Reserve Program within the Department of Agriculture. It was intended for the entire nation, but particularly for the erosion-prone plains. It authorized USDA to make voluntary agreements with agricultural producers to protect environmentally sensitive land and defined the CRP‟s purposes as controlling soil erosio n, improving the quality of water, and enhancing wildlife habitat. To be eligible, lands must have been planted to an agricultural commodity by its owner during 4 of the previous 6 crop years, rate high on an erodibility index, and be located in a national or state conservation priority area (like the plains). The government rents the land from farmers for ten-year periods and helps re-establish native vegetation on it.The CRP program was established during the presidential administration of Ronald Reagan, whose fervor for ending government intervention in the market place seemingly knew no bounds. The CRP, nonetheless, is such an intervention. Even free-marketfundamentalists have come around to agree with pro-government planners (and this author) that aggressive farming must be controlled to prevent another thirties-style disaster. They have admitted that wind erosion is a human-caused problem and that its solution lies in grassland restoration on a large scale. The nation cannot, it is now agreed o n all sides, depend on the farmer‟s economic self-interest to bring back the grass or prevent erosion. Pragmatism has triumphed over ideology.Many have hailed the CRP as one of the most effective environmental improvement programs in American history. It has certainly been popular among farmers and ranchers as well as environmentalists. For fiscal year 2003, the government was authorized to enroll 53 million acres, an area more than half the size of the national park or national wildlife refuge system. But so large and popular a program comes with a huge price tag: billions of dollars in rental fees that must be kept high enough and secure enough to appeal to farmers in perpetuity. The CRP‟s chief weakness is that it leaves the private property and cash nexus intact.Farmers, it seems, must be paid by the government to do the ecologically rational and socially responsible thing. Regulation at any level, local or federal, is unacceptable. We may not think it right to pay factory owners to stop exploiting children or discriminating against people of color, but we accept the notion that farmers must be paid to do the right thing with the land. Conservation has thus become a new way to draw supplementary income out of the federal treasury.An alternat ive to the CRP‟s strategy of renting and restoring the sensitive lands of the Great Plains comes from a New Jersey husband-wife team, Frank and Deborah Popper. Touring the region as a federal land-use consultant in the 1970s, Frank concluded that thewhole history of frontier settlement had been a miscalculation, that people will never be able to get a secure hold in such a place. Forty years after the Dust Bowl, the region has not yet recovered in population levels or comparative income.4Subsequent da ta has tended to confirm the Popper‟s pessimism about the long-term future of the plains. From Texas to Canada, the region has been losing rural inhabitants for the past 70 years. And the region has not been, on the whole, keeping up with the rest of the country in prosperity. Nebraska now has 7 of the nation‟s 12 poorest counties. Cimarron County, Oklahoma (profiled in this book), has only 3000 residents today, compared to 5400 in 1930; it counts fewer than 2 people per square mile, the demographic standard that, in the late 19th century, historian Frederick Jackson Turner and geographer Henry Gannett used to designate the “unsettled” frontier. Take away federal aid which comes to the plains in the form of Social Security, farm subsidies, and drought assistance, and hundreds of western communities would soon collapse.To relieve the nation‟s taxpayers and save the plains residents from their stubborn downward spiral, the Poppers propose a massive program of “deprivatization,” taking 139,000 square miles out of private ownership—about a fourth of the region‟s 400 million acres, and more than double the acreage covered nationally by the CRP--and creating a permanent, and enormous, wildlife refuge. They call it “the Buffalo Commons.” Deer, antelope, bison, and elk would once more roam freely across a large part of the continent, and the native grasslands would once again reign supreme. Tourists would come and spend money to see the world‟s largest ecological restoration project, but the grandiose dream of turning all of the grasslands into an intense producer of food and wealth would vanish.Although controversial where the CRP has been popular, the Buffalo Commons is a more practical and less costly solution for the long term. That such an idea has even been proposed, that a debate has been raging over it, that increasingly plains residents are losing faith in traditional thinking, is more good news. The plains, like the nation, are in need of some bold ideas about how to live more carefully with nature for the longest time. The market economy will never find such ideas attractive, or make them possible, which is why government must take the lead.But what to do with the rest of the plains--those 300 million acres, more or less, where private ownership will continue to rule and where a more resilient agriculture and rural life must be found? How can we farm those lands without destroying them? Here again comes some good news in the form of bold proposals. Wes Jackson, a biologist and native Kansan, co-founder of the Land Institute, has proposed a fundamental changein how we think about agriculture. Since its invention thousands of years ago, farming has been primarily a work of tilling bare soil and planting annual seeds, hoping for rapid growth and a big harvest. While that may have been a safe enough practice on silt-rich floodplains with well-watered soils, it has been full of risk as farmers have moved elsewhere and created a global epidemic of erosion. We need a new model, Jackson argues, for raising food in those more demanding places.In 1980 (one year after this book appeared) Jackson published his New Roots for Agriculture in which he envisioned an agriculture based on evolutionary biology and ecology: “a polyculture of perennials.”5 The original prairie should serve as a model tobe imitated rather than an enemy to be destroyed. In its natural state a prairie can include dozens or even hundreds of plant species, some well adapted to drought, others fertilizingthe soil by fixing nitrogen, others emitting chemical protection from voracious insects. Mostly, those plants are perennials that last for years before offspring take their place. Where the conventional farmer buys a single variety of seed every year, plows and plants on an annual cycle, and expends much human labor and fossil fuel energy in order to raise a crop, nature follows a different strategy. Agriculturists would do well to learn from those natural processes, to try to imitate the prairie.It will take at least another half century, the Land Institute admits, to perfect a new agriculture based on nature‟s wisdom. Scientists need to identify which native plants have the highest protein yield, then help those plants improve with selective breeding, then learn to grow them together in a mimic prairie, then figure out how to harvest that newfangled crop and turn it into foodstuffs. More recently, Jackson and his fellow plant breeders have pursued a near-term strategy of perennializing major grain crops like wheat and sorghum. They are going back to the time when those plants were wild grasses and trying to recover the natural resilience that has been bred out of them over the centuries.Here again is a remedy for the plains that market economics will not pursue. All-out production of the most immediately profitable crops is what capitalism, agricultural or industrial, knows how to do, while investing in scientific research and developing a futuristic farming based on ecology and evolution get no takers. Even the land-grant colleges and the Department of Agriculture, fixed as they are on maximizing commodity production, have shown little interest in a radical shift toward natural-systems agriculture. But the good news is that, for the first time since Americans began to show up with their railroads, grain elevators, and plows, the region can dare to dream about revolutionary possibilities. One day, if the Land Institute is successful, we may witness a Great Plainswhere native flora and flora flourish as they once did, through good years and bad, while applied ecologists show farmers how to raise food on what looks like a prairie.Contrasting with these new approaches to the Plains based on ecological science is another vision pursued by agribusiness over the past quarter-century. It amounts to an intensification of the same attitudes that gave us the original Dust Bowl. Immense wealth has accumulated in a few hands through this vision, but almost everyone realizes that it cannot endure indefinitely, that a crash—or at least an end--is some day coming.Standing at the dead center of that entrepreneurial agriculture on the southern plains is the beef cow. Once a land of longhorns, Herefords, and Angus roaming across a native prairie, replacing the extinguished bison, much of the region has been transformed into industrial meat production. Cattle are imported from all directions and confined in vast feedlots where they are fed on grains raised by irrigation. Once fattened up, they travel to massive slaughterhouses (or in curr ent sanitized parlance, “processing plants”) where they are cut up for the steaks and hamburgers that Americans consume by the billions. Increasingly, hogs have become part of the same meat factory. They are gathered into “confinement” facilities where t hey live out their lives under artificial light and are pumped up with feed and antibiotics. Chicago, Omaha, and Kansas City no longer do the work of killing and packaging the nation‟s meat supply; the southern plains have taken on the bloody job.Dodge City, where television marshal Matt Dillon once stood at the bar of the Long Branch saloon chatting up the barmaid Kitty, is now the site of three gargantuan feedlots. Their proud achievements are emblazoned on a roadside sign east of town, looking down on a bovine metropolis of 60,000. Each cow in that metropolis gets 140 days ofresidency to reach a weight of 1,100 pounds. Half of that bulk is edible meat. By-products include pharmaceuticals, leather goods, cosmetics, animal feeds, photographic film, and fertilizers. Together, the Excel and National Beef companies fatten enough animals to feed 16 million people a year. They have helped make the state of Kansas the nation‟s leader in commercial cattle production.A thousand cattle trucks load up animals each day and transport them farther west to the outskirts of Garden City. Here, the multinational corporations ConAgra and Iowa Beef (the latter owned by Tyson Foods) slaughter 9500 animals every 24 hours. The surrounding county has even more capacity than Dodge City--12 feedlots with a capacity to feed over 284,000 head of cattle. Those animals consume annually over 300 million bushels of feed grains and nearly a million tons of hay.The Kansas cattle industry, most of it concentrated on the semi-arid plains, alone generates over $4 billion a year. Add in the adjoining states and the Texas panhandle, and one begins to get an idea of just how far this vision of the region as meat factory has gone. Some of its cash receipts stay in local hands, making Garden City and its hinterland a boom country. Finney County‟s population increased by 22.5% from 1990 to 2000, almost 3 times the state average. But then when one examines the distribution of that wealth derived from meat, the reality is not so rosy. In 1999, the county‟s median household income was below the state average, while the percentage of persons below the poverty line was substantially above the state average (14.2% versus 9.9%). Obviously, most of the money leaves the county and leaves the state, going to corporate headquarters in Arkansas, Nebraska, and beyond.6The growth of a new-era cattle kingdom on the plains has attracted job seekers from distant places. For a while the work force in the beef processing industry was heavily Vietna mese; but this is tough, dangerous work (meatpacking has one of industry‟s worst personal injuries records), and the Vietnamese have quickly moved out of the processing plants, leaving a work force mainly made up of Hispanics who are hungry for employment. In the latest census nearly half of Finney County‟s population was of Hispanic or Latino origin; in nearby Haskell County (profiled in this book), it was one-quarter.7However one calculates its economic pluses and minuses, the feedlot-beef processing enterprise has a tremendous need for natural resources and a tremendous impact on its environment. Above all, it must have water and lots of it. The animals require water to drink, but even more the farmers who grow their feed need water for irrigation. Dryland farming could never support the scale of meat production now found on the southern plains. So agriculturists have found that needed abundance underground, in deep wells as I briefly discussed in the original edition of this book, and water pumping has now become ubiquitous. The entire horizon of southwestern Kansas is crawling with center-pivot irrigation rigs that resemble huge segmented insects making great circles on the ground. The crops they irrigate from their drip hoses are mainly corn, sorghum, and alfalfa, while winter wheat has diminished in acreage, being far less profitable or usable as cattle feed.As farmers have tapped every drop of groundwater in the riparian zone, the flow of virtually every stream or river in western Kansas has dried up. There is less surface water here today than when it was first labeled the Great American Desert. Farmers havepunched down into the High Plains aquifer, which includes the Ogallala aquifer, extending under eight states in the Great Plains; this source supplies 70 percent of the water used by Kansans each day. Some parts of that aquifer have been practically depleted; others have lots of water remaining, but it is not easy to determine how much longer the supply will last. Out of hundreds of thousands of wells drilled into the aquifer, we collect data on water levels in only about 9500. Moreover, the rate of withdrawal is not fixed, but varies with the price of fuel and farm commodities and with the amount of surface precipitation. Moreover, as the plains face a future of global warming, when annual precipitation is likely to fall and droughts become more frequent and severe, the supplies for irrigation will go down rapidly.8 Some areas might have 100 years of water left if current rates of withdrawal could be maintained, others fewer than 25 years—but then who can say what demands the future will bring?9Like the fabled copper and gold fields of the American West, the livestock industry that dominates the Great Plains today is a mining economy. It extracts meat instead of ore. Like all mining economies, its end will inevitably be ghost towns, abandoned houses, derelict farms, and bankrupt businesses. Then, when there is little or no water left to grow crops, when the cycle has come full circle, will the dust begin to blow? It always has in the past. There is the bad news that we must put alongside the good.In the Darwinian world of nature, the fittest are supposed to survive, but it is never easy to determine who or what is the most fit. Will capitalism prove to be the fittest, or will something else? Will natural-systems agriculture or the feedlot industry, Hispanics or Anglos, buffalo grass or sorghum? A mere century or two of American domination of the plains is not an adequate base for making any predictions about the long-term survival。

女创作歌手，会用木
吉他、钢琴演奏。
最受欢迎乡村女艺人
最佳新人奖
Classical 古典乐
古典音乐是植根于西方传统礼拜式音乐和世俗音乐， 其范围涵盖了11世纪至今的全部时期。古典音乐带 给人们的不仅仅是优美的旋律，充满意趣的乐思， 还有真挚的情感，或宁静、典雅，或震撼、鼓舞， 或欢喜、快乐，或悲伤、惆怅……
美国从来不缺少英雄，总统山(拉什莫尔山)就是美国英 雄主义文化最ajor types
Hip Hop（嘻哈）
R&B（节奏布鲁斯）
Rock&roll（摇滚乐） American country music （美国乡村音乐） Classical（古典音乐）
·· ·
中国文化已经很好的融入美利坚
美国大选反映了美国的民主 文化
不要忘记世贸大厦，它曾经是美国经济文化的代表
通过NBA，世界才知道，篮球原来可以这样打
大菲 尔 普 斯 让 世 界 惊 讶 与 美 国 体 育 文 化 的 强
橄榄球让总统都为之疯狂
迪士尼乐园让更多的年轻一代开始喜欢美国
这 里 从 来 不 缺 乏 明 星
——Country music's father
吉米· 罗杰斯对美国乡村音乐的影响是巨大的，虽然 他的演艺生涯大部分是在美国经济最不景气的时期度 过，但他的演出常集中在最贫穷的地区，而且生活并 不宽裕的村民经常购买他的最新唱片。他也是老百姓 心中的英雄，被誉为“乡村音乐之父”。
泰勒· 斯威夫特
美国乡村音乐
Crazy 疯狂
Passion 激情
Country music
乡村音乐
.
乡村音乐是一种当代的流行音乐，起源于美国南部与阿帕拉契山区。 乡村音乐的根源可追溯至1920年代，融合了传统民谣音乐、凯尔 特音乐、福音音乐及古时音乐。乡村音乐的曲调，一般都很流畅、 动听，曲式结构也比较简单。

World Trade Center
美国大选反映了美国的民主 文化
The United States is a democratic country
NBA
NBA League is composed of American" National Basketball Association (NBA )" founder of the game, the fierce competition. Degree and level of high is recognized as the most in the world
Rugby
Hollywood
Silicon Valley
People are the traditional title of the Silicon Valley in the United States of California, San Francisco via the Santa Clara to San Jose nearly 50 kilometers of a narrow strip of the United States, is an important base for the electronics industry, is also the world 's most well-known electronics industry concentration. It is with the nineteen sixties since metaphase, microelectronic technology high speed development and gradually form, Cisco, Intel, HP and has, Lucent, apples and other large companies, science, technology, production as a whole.

Hollywood Walkerican culture Hollywood
himmy han
1Major description 2Location
目 录
CONTENTS
3Major industries
4Classical projects 5Tourists
1Major description
Hollywood is the first by photographer looking for location to the discovery, about the beginning of the 20th century, it attract many photographers, then some in order to avoid patent firm control of small companies and independent film makers have flocked to, and gradually formed a film center. "Hollywood" is often used directly to refer to the film industry in the south of the United States of California.
D r e a m W o r k s , D i s n e y , 2 0 t h
birthplace of the global fashion, but is one of the world's music and film industry with the world's top entertainment and luxury brands, leads and represents the highest level of global fashion.