Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter. But first of all let us think of the many mercies for which we have to be thankful, and then let us be just as well as generous; for certainly the magazines have been of enormous benefit to the reading public as well as to those whose profession it is to entertain, amuse, or instruct that public.
The magazines have not only raised the rates of compensation for literary labor1, but they have spread the reading habit to an enormous extent, and are still educating vast numbers of people—of a class[Pg 161] that do not read at all when they happen to be born in other countries—to become habitual2 buyers of books and periodicals. Moreover it must be said of the editors of these publications that they place their time at the disposal of every aspiring3 author who brings his manuscript to them. In other words, they give careful attention to whatever work is submitted to them, and are glad to buy and pay promptly4 for such stories and poems as they may deem suitable to their needs. I have never seen any disposition5 on the part of any of them to crush budding genius, but, on the contrary, I have frequently met them on dark, rainy nights hunting through the town with lanterns in their hands for new writers. In fact, I do not know of any place in this world where a young man may look for fairer attention and encouragement than he will find in the office of a modern magazine.
I have heard these editors denounced,[Pg 162] one and all, by infuriated poets and romancers, for the “favoritism” which had been shown to certain contributors, but I have generally found that when they erred6 in this way it was on the side of charity; and if certain writers whose contributions we generally skip occupy more room in the monthlies than we think they ought to, it is not because they are editorial pets, but because they have been careful students of the great literary principles described in these pages, and have thereby7 acquired the art of writing exactly what can be printed without injury to the susceptibilities of a single advertiser or subscriber8.
But we have special cause for being thankful to the magazines when we read some of the hysterical9, obstetrical, and epigrammatic romances which have enjoyed such an astonishing vogue10 in England of late years. Thank Heaven! no American magazine—so far as my knowledge[Pg 163] goes—has had the effrontery11 to offer its readers any such noisome12, diseased literature as that with which the alleged13 “clever” people of London have flooded our market. To my way of thinking the epigrammatic books are the most offensive of the whole lot, and certainly there is nothing better calculated to plunge14 one into the depths of despair and shame than the perusal15 of a modern British novel whose characters are forever “showing off,” as children say, and who seem to devote their lives to uttering sixpenny cynicisms and evolving, with infinite pains and travail16, the sort of remarks that pass current in the “smart London set”—if these chroniclers are to be believed—as wit.
Callow and ingenuous17 youth betrays itself by two unmistakable earmarks. One of these is in the form of a slight down on the cheek, and the other is the belief that Oscar Wilde writes brilliant epigram.
[Pg 164]I attended the first American representation of a play by that distinguished18 author, and can well recall my feelings when an able-bodied mummer took the centre of the stage and said, with the air of a man who has been rolling a good thing under his tongue all the evening, and at last has a chance to utter it: “Time is the thief of procrastination19.” A murmur20 of admiration21 ran through the house, but I—I sobbed22 like a heart-broken child.
And yet Mr. Wilde is one of the cleverest of the whole brood of fat-witted chromo-cynics whose vulgar flippancies have somehow come to be regarded as witty23 and amusing, and that, too, by people who ought to know better. It positively24 makes me sick to see one of these paper-covered chronicles of fashionable imbecility lying on a parlor25 table, and to hear it spoken of as “so delightfully26 bright and clever, don’t you know.”
[Pg 165]Heine was a genuine cynic and the maker28 of epigrams which he wrote as easily and naturally as Bobby Burns wrote verses; and if there is anything in the world which can be accomplished29, if at all, without manual labor and the accompanying sweat of the brow, it is the utterance30 of really witty or epigrammatic remarks. But these leaden-footed English wits somehow convey to me a vision of a cynic in toil-stained overalls31 going forth32 in the gray of the early morning, dinner-pail in hand, for a hard day’s work at being epigrammatic and funny.
And while I am on the subject of epigram and cynicism, I cannot help wondering what Heine would have done for a living had his lot been cast in our own age and country. Imagine him offering manuscript to the Ladies’ Home Journal! (By the way, Bok ought not to let those photographs go for twenty-five cents apiece. They’re worth a dollar if they’re[Pg 166] worth a cent.) Think of the sensation that the Reisebilder would create in the Century office!
My own opinion is that Heine would, were he living here to-day, find occupation as a paragrapher on some Western paper, acquire some nebulous renown33 as the “Ann Arbor34 Clarion35 man” or the “Omaha Bumblebee man,” and be consigned36 in his old age to that Home for Literary Incurables37 known as the McClure Syndicate.
There is a book of excerpts38 from the writings of this gifted man, published some years ago by Henry Holt & Co., and now, unhappily enough, out of print. These excerpts are so well selected and convey to us so vividly39 the charm of this matchless writer that I took the trouble some time ago to inquire into the way in which the work was done. I learned on undisputed authority that Mr. Holt, who has not spent his life in the literary business for nothing, borrowed a pruning40-hook[Pg 167] from the Century office, placed it, together with Heine’s complete works, in the hands of an experienced and skilled magazine editor, and bade him “edit” them as if they were intended for publication in his own monthly. The skilled and experienced editor opened the volumes, and the pruning-hook—also a skilled and experienced instrument of mutilation—fairly leaped from its scabbard in its eagerness to eliminate the dangerous passages. When the editor had completed his task Mr. Holt gathered up the parings from the floor and published them under the title of Scintillations from Heine; and I sincerely hope that a new edition of this book will be brought out before long, if for no other purpose than to show people what a real epigram is and how sharp it can bite.
There is another variety of literature which I dislike, and which seems to have attained41 a ranker and more unwholesome[Pg 168] growth in this country than elsewhere. I refer to those articles and books whose sole purpose seems to be the exploiting of men and women who are really unworthy of any serious consideration. The Johnsonian period is rich in specimens42 of this sort of work, and the future historian will marvel43 at the absurd prominence44 given in this enlightened age to people who have never accomplished anything in their lives, and who themselves evince the greatest eagerness to transmit to posterity45 authentic46 records of their failures.
“How I Lost the Battle,” by Captain Runoff, of the Russian army; “Driven out of Asia Minor,” by General Skates; and “Ever so Many Miles from the North Pole,” by Lieutenant47 Queary, are excellent examples of this style of literature; but a far lower depth was reached about two years ago, when the Harpers burst into enthusiastic praise of a young man named Chanler, who had announced his[Pg 169] intention of discovering Africa, and proposed to awe48 and conciliate the ferocious49 native chiefs by performing in their presence various difficult feats50 of legerdemain51 which he had taken the pains to learn from a professional master in London.
What has become of that gifted young man for whom the Harpers predicted such a rosy52 future? Perhaps at this very moment he is seated in a deep, shady African jungle making an omelet in a high silk hat or converting a soiled pocket-handkerchief into a glass globe full of goldfish. I can picture him standing53, alone and unarmed, before thousands of hostile spears. His eye is clear and his cheek unblanched. In another moment he will be taking rabbits out of the chieftain’s ears, and the dusky warriors54 will cower55, in abject56 submission57, at his feet.
There is one thing that can be said in favor of Mr. Chanler, and that is that up[Pg 170] to the present moment he has not annoyed his fellow-creatures with any lectures or articles or stories descriptive of the wonders that he did not discover during his journeyings in the Dark Continent. His reticence58 is commendable59, and should serve as an example to various windy travelers who “explore” during a period of eight weeks and then talk for the rest of their lives.
Verily this is a golden age for “fakirs,” quacks60, and intellectual feather-weights, and my friendly advice to all who may be classified under any one of those three heads is to make hay while the sun shines, because, in my belief, the coming decade will see them relegated61 to the obscurity in which they naturally belong. But our little tuppenny gods and celebrities62 have kicked up so much dust of late years that they have contrived63 to obscure the fame of men who are infinitely64 better worth talking about.
[Pg 171]Singularly enough, the American who achieved more with his pen than any one else in his generation is almost unknown to the majority of his countrymen and countrywomen, although our government paid an unusual tribute to his memory by bringing his remains65 back to his native land in a man-of-war. The man of whom I write was simply a reporter employed by the New York Herald66 to chronicle contemporaneous European history. It was he who told the civilized67 world the truth about the atrocities68 committed by the Turkish invaders69 of Bulgaria in a series of letters to the London Daily News—letters which became, in the hands of Mr. Gladstone, a weapon with which he aroused the popular feeling until the Beaconsfield ministry70 was swept from power and the Jingo spirit held in check while Russia carried on her “holy war” against the Porte. There is not a statesman or sovereign in Europe who does not know[Pg 172] of the important r?le which this American reporter played in continental71 affairs at the time of the Russo-Turkish war. If you ask a Bulgarian or Montenegrin if he ever heard of J. A. MacGahan he will very likely say to you what one of them said to me: “Did you, an American, ever hear of George Washington? Well, MacGahan was our Washington, and there is not a peasant in all my country who is not familiar with his name.”
This countryman of ours, in whose achievements I have such a sturdy pride, died literally72 in the harness in 1879, and every year on the 9th of June, throughout all the land of which he was the acknowledged savior, the solemn prayers of the church are offered for the repose73 of his soul. It may be that he has won a higher fame than he would if he had lived to make himself known to the American public through the medium of the lecture platform, but nevertheless I often wish[Pg 173] that his renown in the land of his birth were nearer in accord with his deserts than it is.
I doubt if any system, either literary, political, or social—unless it be negro slavery—has ever had a fairer trial in this country than has that of pruning-hook editing, of which I have treated in these pages; and that system may be responsible, in part, for the fact that three quarters of the fiction offered in bookstores to-day is the work of foreign writers, most of whom have been reared in the comparatively free and independent literary atmosphere of Great Britain, and have always addressed their books directly to the public instead of the editors of magazines. It is true that Smith or Mudie, whose influence in the book-trade is almost incalculable, occasionally refuse to circulate a novel out of consideration for the feelings of the “young person,” but such a proceeding74 is not nearly as disastrous[Pg 174] to a writer as the refusal of his manuscript by all the magazines would be to an American. A ton of manuscript makes no more commotion75 when returned to its authors than the touch of a humming-bird on a lily-petal; but when a book like Esther Waters is cast out of an English circulating library it falls with a crash that is heard throughout the length and breadth of the three kingdoms, while the author and his friends, with a little assistance from the author’s enemies, make the welkin ring with their cries.
The recent discussion over “Trilby” and the action of its publishers in cutting out this passage and pruning that have given the public a little insight into the methods in vogue in our large literary establishments—methods which I have tried to explain in this book. The very fact that Mr. Du Maurier’s manuscript stood in need of the pruning-hook is, to me, proof positive that he never sat on[Pg 175] the poets’ bench in the Ledger76 office or practised his profession under the rule of Dr. Holland.
It may be that at this very moment a great many American story-readers are asking themselves why it is that native authors who know their trade so well that the magazines will publish anything that they offer should be unable to write a serial77 equal to that of a gray-haired novice78 like Mr. Du Maurier, who, I will wager79, knows absolutely nothing about the immortal80 principles which are the very lamps unto the feet of his American contemporaries. I shudder81 to think of what the world would have lost had the author of “Trilby” gone about his work with the Holland fetters82 on his wrists, the fear of the gas-fitter in his heart, the awful pruning-hook hanging by a single hair over his head, and the ominous83 shadow of Robert Bonner falling across the pages of his story.
[Pg 176]There are other English writers who have “arrived” during the past half-dozen years—a sufficient number, indeed, to make us feel that there must be some deep-seated cause for the comparatively slow progress which our own literature has made in the same time.
It is no easy matter to fairly estimate the literary worth of writers who have been before the public such a short time, especially when we take into consideration the wide difference in personal tastes, and therefore I have sought the aid of a number of critical and learned friends in the preparation of a list of writers which I confess is not exactly the one that I would print had I consulted only my own personal tastes.
This is the list which I offer as a result of many consultations84 with people who are supposed to understand the subject: J. M. Barrie, Mrs. Humphry Ward85, Hall Caine, Rudyard Kipling, Conan Doyle,[Pg 177] Barry Paine, J. K. Jerome, I. Zangwill, Marie Corelli, Quiller Couch, S. R. Crockett, Sarah Grand, Beatrice Harraden, Anthony Hope, and Stanley J. Weyman—fifteen in all besides Mr. Du Maurier.
From this catalogue of talent and genius it is possible to select ten whose position in letters is assured, although tastes will differ as to the names on the last end of the list.
Now let us see how many writers have been raised to maturity86 in the carefully watched and over-cultivated magazine soil during the same period of time—say half a dozen years. Can we point to sixteen, or ten, or even five who have made their way into the great white light within that time?
No; we have precisely87 one writer to show as the fruit of American literary endeavor during six years, and that writer is a woman who has confined herself—and wisely, too, I suspect—to the portrayal[Pg 178] of life and character among the New England hills and villages. A narrow field, it may be said, but she has surveyed it with the true artistic88 eye, and at her touch it has yielded truthful89, appreciative90, honest literature—stories with an underlying91 note of sadness that rings true as steel and is a bit of the very essence of rural New England life. Of course this writer is in an enviable position because she enjoys all the advantages of magazine authorship and the prestige which accompanies it, and is, to all practical purposes, exempt92 from the ordeal93 of the pruning-hook to which other authors are obliged to submit. I do not say this in disparagement94 of her great talents; I only mean to say that her stories all lie within the necessary magazine limitations, and she can write to the very top of her bent95 without getting within gunshot of the barbed-wire fences which restrict the endeavors of authors whose natural impulse[Pg 179] it is to work in the deeper and broader strata96 of humanity.
I do not deny that there are several bright and clever young men and women who have done excellent literary work in the magazines and will undoubtedly97 live to do even better in the future. I know of two or three who are, according to my way of thinking, better entitled to mention than some of the English authors whom I have named; but the woman whom I have in mind is the one recent acquisition to American letters, who draws truthful pictures from a proper point of view, writes fully27 as well to-day as she did six years ago, and has, moreover, given us one good novel. I do not know of a single other bright young American writer—and very clever some of them are, too—of whom nearly as much as this can be fairly said.
If the names of Hamlin Garland or Edward Bellamy occur to any of my[Pg 180] readers it should be remembered that they sprang up by the wayside and are not the product of the rich magazine soil.
In bringing my modest preachment to a close, it is with a hope that my readers will pardon any errors of humor into which I may have fallen, or at least find in them a reasonable excuse for my effrontery in offering advice while I am still under ninety-seven years of age. I hope that I have done full justice to the established literary dynasty which began with Robert Bonner and of which Mr. Johnson is now the acknowledged head.
And let my last word be one of thankfulness because that dynasty has at least kept our national literature clean—as clean as a whistle or a pipe-stem.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
labor
|
|
| n.劳动，努力，工作，劳工；分娩；vi.劳动，努力，苦干；vt.详细分析；麻烦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
habitual
|
|
| adj.习惯性的；通常的，惯常的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
aspiring
|
|
| adj.有志气的；有抱负的；高耸的v.渴望；追求 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
promptly
|
|
| adv.及时地，敏捷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
disposition
|
|
| n.性情，性格；意向，倾向；排列，部署 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
erred
|
|
| 犯错误，做错事( err的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
subscriber
|
|
| n.用户，订户；（慈善机关等的）定期捐款者；预约者；签署者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
hysterical
|
|
| adj.情绪异常激动的，歇斯底里般的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
Vogue
|
|
| n.时髦，时尚；adj.流行的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
effrontery
|
|
| n.厚颜无耻 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
noisome
|
|
| adj.有害的，可厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
plunge
|
|
| v.跳入，(使)投入，(使)陷入；猛冲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
perusal
|
|
| n.细读，熟读；目测 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
travail
|
|
| n.阵痛；努力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
ingenuous
|
|
| adj.纯朴的，单纯的；天真的；坦率的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
procrastination
|
|
| n.拖延，耽搁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
murmur
|
|
| n.低语，低声的怨言；v.低语，低声而言 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
admiration
|
|
| n.钦佩，赞美，羡慕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
sobbed
|
|
| 哭泣，啜泣( sob的过去式和过去分词 )； 哭诉，呜咽地说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
witty
|
|
| adj.机智的，风趣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
positively
|
|
| adv.明确地，断然，坚决地；实在，确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
parlor
|
|
| n.店铺，营业室；会客室，客厅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
delightfully
|
|
| 大喜，欣然 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
maker
|
|
| n.制造者，制造商 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
accomplished
|
|
| adj.有才艺的；有造诣的；达到了的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
utterance
|
|
| n.用言语表达，话语，言语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
overalls
|
|
| n.（复）工装裤；长罩衣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
renown
|
|
| n.声誉，名望 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
arbor
|
|
| n.凉亭；树木 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
clarion
|
|
| n.尖音小号声；尖音小号 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
consigned
|
|
| v.把…置于（令人不快的境地）( consign的过去式和过去分词 )；把…托付给；把…托人代售；丟弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
incurables
|
|
| 无法治愈，不可救药( incurable的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
38
excerpts
|
|
| n.摘录，摘要( excerpt的名词复数 )；节选（音乐，电影）片段 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
vividly
|
|
| adv.清楚地，鲜明地，生动地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
pruning
|
|
| n.修枝，剪枝，修剪v.修剪（树木等）( prune的现在分词 )；精简某事物，除去某事物多余的部分 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
specimens
|
|
| n.样品( specimen的名词复数 )；范例；（化验的）抽样；某种类型的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
marvel
|
|
| vi.(at)惊叹vt.感到惊异；n.令人惊异的事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
prominence
|
|
| n.突出；显著；杰出；重要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
posterity
|
|
| n.后裔，子孙，后代 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
authentic
|
|
| a.真的，真正的；可靠的，可信的，有根据的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
lieutenant
|
|
| n.陆军中尉，海军上尉；代理官员，副职官员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
awe
|
|
| n.敬畏，惊惧；vt.使敬畏，使惊惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
ferocious
|
|
| adj.凶猛的，残暴的，极度的，十分强烈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
feats
|
|
| 功绩，伟业，技艺( feat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
legerdemain
|
|
| n.戏法，诈术 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
rosy
|
|
| adj.美好的，乐观的，玫瑰色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
warriors
|
|
| 武士，勇士，战士( warrior的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
cower
|
|
| v.畏缩，退缩，抖缩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
abject
|
|
| adj.极可怜的，卑屈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
submission
|
|
| n.服从，投降；温顺，谦虚；提出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
reticence
|
|
| n.沉默，含蓄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
commendable
|
|
| adj.值得称赞的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
quacks
|
|
| abbr.quacksalvers 庸医，骗子(16世纪习惯用水银或汞治疗梅毒的人)n.江湖医生( quack的名词复数 )；江湖郎中；（鸭子的）呱呱声v.（鸭子）发出嘎嘎声( quack的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
relegated
|
|
| v.使降级( relegate的过去式和过去分词 )；使降职；转移；把…归类 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
celebrities
|
|
| n.（尤指娱乐界的）名人( celebrity的名词复数 )；名流；名声；名誉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
contrived
|
|
| adj.不自然的，做作的；虚构的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
infinitely
|
|
| adv.无限地，无穷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
herald
|
|
| vt.预示...的来临，预告，宣布，欢迎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
civilized
|
|
| a.有教养的，文雅的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
atrocities
|
|
| n.邪恶，暴行( atrocity的名词复数 )；滔天大罪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
invaders
|
|
| 入侵者，侵略者，侵入物( invader的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
ministry
|
|
| n.(政府的)部；牧师 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
continental
|
|
| adj.大陆的，大陆性的，欧洲大陆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
literally
|
|
| adv.照字面意义，逐字地；确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
repose
|
|
| v.(使)休息；n.安息 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
proceeding
|
|
| n.行动，进行，(pl.)会议录，学报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
commotion
|
|
| n.骚动，动乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
ledger
|
|
| n.总帐，分类帐；帐簿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
serial
|
|
| n.连本影片，连本电视节目；adj.连续的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
novice
|
|
| adj.新手的，生手的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
wager
|
|
| n.赌注；vt.押注，打赌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
immortal
|
|
| adj.不朽的；永生的，不死的；神的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
shudder
|
|
| v.战粟，震动，剧烈地摇晃；n.战粟，抖动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
fetters
|
|
| n.脚镣( fetter的名词复数 )；束缚v.给…上脚镣，束缚( fetter的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
ominous
|
|
| adj.不祥的，不吉的，预兆的，预示的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
consultations
|
|
| n.磋商（会议）( consultation的名词复数 )；商讨会；协商会；查找 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
ward
|
|
| n.守卫，监护，病房，行政区，由监护人或法院保护的人（尤指儿童）；vt.守护，躲开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
maturity
|
|
| n.成熟；完成；(支票、债券等)到期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
artistic
|
|
| adj.艺术(家)的，美术(家)的；善于艺术创作的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
truthful
|
|
| adj.真实的，说实话的，诚实的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
appreciative
|
|
| adj.有鉴赏力的，有眼力的；感激的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
underlying
|
|
| adj.在下面的，含蓄的，潜在的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
exempt
|
|
| adj.免除的；v.使免除；n.免税者，被免除义务者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
ordeal
|
|
| n.苦难经历，（尤指对品格、耐力的）严峻考验 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
disparagement
|
|
| n.轻视，轻蔑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
bent
|
|
| n.爱好，癖好；adj.弯的；决心的，一心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
strata
|
|
| n.地层（复数）；社会阶层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |