“The party will be ill at ease if any one of us should attempt, as it were personally, to take the place of the sick Lenin. This time let us manage without an introductory political report, and say what we have to say in connection with the separate items of the agenda. Besides,” I added, “there are differences between us on economic questions.”
“I don’t see any differences,” Stalin replied, while Kalinin added: “On almost all questions, the Politbureau adopts your proposals.” Zinoviev was on leave in the Caucasus. The question remained undecided. At any rate, I agreed to report on industry.
Stalin knew that a storm was menacing him from Lenin’s direction, and tried in every way to ingratiate himself with me. He kept repeating that the political report should be made by the most influential2 and popular member of the Central Committee after Lenin: i.e., Trotsky, and that the party expected it and would not understand anything else. In his feigned3 at tempts4 at friendliness5, he seemed even more alien than in his frank exhibitions of enmity, the more so because his motives6 were so obvious.
Zinoviev soon returned from the Caucasus. At that time, very close factional conferences were continually being held behind my back. Zinoviev demanded that he be allowed to make the political report. Kamenev was asking the “old Bolsheviks,” the majority of whom had at some time left the party for ten or fifteen years: “Are we to allow Trotsky to become the one person empowered to direct the party and the state?” They began more frequently to rake up my past and my old disagreements with Lenin; it became Zinoviev’s specialty7. In the meantime, Lenin’s condition took a sharp turn for the worse, so that danger no longer threatened there. The trio decided1 that the political report should be made by Zinoviev. I raised no objection when, after due preparation behind the scenes, the question was put before the Politbureau. Everything bore the stamp of a temporary arrangement. No disagreements were manifest, just as no independent line could be found anywhere in the policy of the trio. My theses on industry were at first accepted without discussion. But when it seemed certain that there was no prospect9 of Lenin’s returning to work, the trio made a sharp about-face, frightened by the too peaceful preparations for the congress. It was looking now for a chance to line itself up against me in the upper circle of the party. At the last moment before the congress, Kamenev proposed the addition of a clause about the peasantry to my resolution, which had already been approved. There would be no sense in dwelling10 on the subject-matter of this amendment11, which had no theoretical or political importance, but was designed as an act of “provocation,” to provide the basis for accusations13 — so far, only behind the scenes — of my “under appreciation” of the peasantry. Three years after his break with Stalin, Kamenev, with his characteristic good-humored cynicism, told me how they had cooked up this accusation12, which of course none of its authors took seriously.
To operate with abstract moral criteria14 in politics is notoriously hopeless. Political morals proceed from politics itself, and are one of its functions. Only a politics that serves a great historical task can insure itself morally irreproachable15 methods. On the contrary, the lowering of the level of political aims inevitably16 leads to moral decline. Figaro, as every one knows, refused to differentiate17 at all between politics and intrigue18. And he lived before the advent19 of the era of parliamentarism! When the moralists of the bourgeois20 democracy attempt to perceive the source of bad political morals in revolutionary dictatorship as such, one can only shrug21 one’s shoulders compassionately22. It would be very instructive to make a cinematic record of modem24 parliamentarism, if but for a single year. But the camera should be placed not alongside the president of the chamber25 of deputies at the moment when a patriotic26 resolution is being adopted, but in quite other places: in the offices of bankers and industrialists27, in the private rooms of editorial offices, in the palaces of the princes of the church, in the salons28 of political ladies, in the ministries29 — and, with it, let the eye of the camera record also the secret correspondence of the party leaders. On the other hand, it would be perfectly30 right to say that very different demands should be imposed on the political morals of a revolutionary dictatorship and on those of parliamentarism. The sharpness of the weapons and methods of dictatorship demands watchful31 antiseptics. A dirty slipper32 is nothing to fear, but an unclean razor is very dangerous. The very methods of the “trio” were, in my eyes, a sign of political backsliding.
The chief difficulty that the conspirators34 faced was that of coming out openly against me before the masses of the people. The workers knew Zinoviev and Kamenev, and listened to them readily. But their behavior during 1917 was still too fresh in every one’s memory. They had no moral authority in the party. Stalin, beyond the narrow circle of the old Bolsheviks, was al most unknown. Some of my friends used to say to me: “They will never dare to come out against you in the open. In the minds of the people you are too inseparably bound to Lenin’s name. It is impossible to erase35 the October revolution, or the Red army, or the civil war.” I did not agree with this. In politics, and especially in revolutionary politics, popular names of acknowledged authority play a very important, sometimes gigantic, but yet not decisive part. In the final analysis, the fate of personal authority is determined36 by the deeper processes going on in the masses. During the rising tide of the revolution the slanders38 against the Bolshevist leaders only strengthened the Bolshevists. During the ebb39 tide of the revolution the slanders against the same men were able to provide the weapons of victory for the Thermidorian reaction.
The objective processes in the country and in the world arena40 were helping41 my opponents. But their task nevertheless was no easy one. The literature, press and agitators42 of the party were still living on the memories of the preceding days passed under the sign of Lenin and Trotsky. It was necessary to turn all this around 180 degrees, not at once, of course, but by several stages. To show the extent of the turn, one must give at least a few illustrations of the prevailing43 tone of the party press toward the leading figures of the revolution.
On October 14, 1922, at the time when Lenin had already returned to work after his first stroke, Radek wrote in the Pravda: “If Comrade Lenin may be called the reason of the revolution, dominating through his transmission of will, Comrade Trotsky may be characterized as the iron will bridled44 by reason. Trotsky’s speech sounded like a bell summoning to work. All its importance, all its meaning, as well as the meaning of our work during the last few years, appears very dearly.” And so forth45. It is true that Radek’s personal exuberance46 became a by word; he was capable of saying one thing and just as capable of following it with another. Much more important is the fact that these lines were printed in the central organ of the party while Lenin was still alive without jarring on any one’s ears.
In 1923, with the conspiracy47 of the trio already a fact, Lu nacharsky was one of the first to try to raise Zinoviev’s pres tige. But how did he set about his work? “Of course,” he wrote in his character sketch48 of Zinoviev, “Lenin and Trotsky have be come the most popular (whether loved or hated) personalities49 of our epoch50, perhaps of the whole world. Zinoviev somewhat re cedes51 before them, but then Lenin and Trotsky had for so long been regarded in our ranks as men of such great gifts, as such undisputed leaders, that no one was much surprised at their amazing growth during the revolution.”
If I quote these pompous52 panegyrics53 in somewhat doubtful taste, I do it only because I need them as elements in the general picture, or, if you like, as evidence for a court trial. It repels55 me to have to quote yet a third witness, Yaroslavsky, whose pane54 gyrics are perhaps even more insufferable than his calumnies56. This man now plays a most important r6le in the party, measur ing by his insignificant57 stature58 the depth of the downfall of its leadership. Yaroslavsky rose to his present position entirely59 by his slandering60 of me. As the official corrupter61 of the history of the party, he represents the past as an unbroker. struggle of Trotsky against Lenin. It goes without saying that Trotsky “under-appreciated” the peasantry, “ignored” the peasantry, “did not notice” the peasantry. But in February of 1923 — that is, at a time when Yaroslavsky must already have been familiar with my relations to Lenin and my views on the peasantry, in a long article dealing62 with the first steps of my literary activity (the years 1900-1902) he characterized my past in the following way:
“The brilliant work of Comrade Trotsky as a writer and publi cist has earned him the world-name of ’prince of pamphieteers,’ as he was called by the English author, George Bernard Shaw. Those who have watched his activity for a quarter of a century, will find that his talent shone with particular brightness.
[MISSING PASSAGE?)
and so on and so forth. “Many readers must have seen the much-reproduced photograph of the youthful Trotsky . . . etc. Under this high forehead there was already seething63 even then a stormy flow of images, thoughts, and impressions which sometimes car ried Comrade Trotsky a bit away from the highroad of history, at times either forcing him to choose paths too roundabout or, on the contrary, to attempt fearlessly to break through where no path was possible. But in all these efforts to find the right way, we had before us a man profoundly devoted64 to the revo lution, matured for the r?le of a tribune, with a tongue as sharp and flexible as steel, that cuts down the opponent . . . ” And so forth.
“The Siberians were carried away with enthusiasm,” Yaroslavsky gushes65 with an excess of zeal66, “after reading these brilliant articles, and waited impatiently for their appearance. Only a few knew their author, and those who knew Trotsky were the last to imagine at that time that he would be one of the recognized leaders of the most revolutionary army and the greatest revolution in the world.” The case of my ignoring the peasantry fares, if possible, even worse at the hands of Yaroslavsky. The first of my literary works was dedicated67 to the peasants. Here is what Yaroslavsky says about it:
“Trotsky could not stay in a Siberian village without exploring all the petty details of its life. First of all, he turns his attention to the administrative68 machinery69 of the Siberian village. In a series of articles, he gives a brilliant characterization of this machinery . . . ” And farther on: “Around himself, Trotsky saw only the village. He suffered over its needs. He was oppressed by its benighted70 condition, its outlawry71.” Yaroslavsky demands that my articles on country life be included in the textbooks. All this in February, 1923, the same month when the version of my inattention to the country was being created for the first time. But Yaroslavsky was then in Siberia, and therefore not yet well informed about the new “Leninism.”
The last example that I want to quote concerns Stalin himself. As early as the occasion of the first anniversary of the revolution, he wrote an article which, though disguised, was directed straight at me. In explanation, one must remember that during the preparation for the October insurrection, Lenin was hiding in Finland; Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, and Kalinin were op posed to an uprising, and no one knew anything about Stalin. As a result, the party connected the October revolution chiefly with my name. During the first anniversary of the October revolution, Stalin made an attempt to weaken this impression by setting up against me the general leadership by the Central Committee. But to make his account at all acceptable, he was obliged to write:
“The entire work of the practical organization of the uprising was carried on under the immediate72 direction of the chairman of the Petrograd Soviet73, Trotsky. One may state without hesitation74 that the party was indebted first and foremost to Comrade Trotsky for the garrison’s prompt going over to the Soviet and for the able organization of the work of the Military Revolutionary Committee.”
If Stalin wrote in this vein75, it was because at that time even he could not write in any other way. It needed years of unbridled baiting before Stalin could venture to state in public:
“Comrade Trotsky did not and could not play any special role either in the party or in the October revolution.” When the contradiction was pointed76 out to him, he replied by merely redoubling his rudeness.
The “trio” could under no circumstances pit itself against me. It could pit against me only Lenin. But for this it was necessary that Lenin himself no longer be able to oppose the trio. In other words, the success of their campaign required either a Lenin who was fatally ill, or his embalmed77 corpse78 in a mausoleum. But even this was not enough. It was necessary that I too be out of the fighting ranks during the campaign. This happened in the fall of 1923.
I am not dealing here with the philosophy of history, but re counting my life against the background of the events with which it was bound up. But I cannot help noting how obligingly the accidental helps the historical law. Broadly speaking, the entire historical process is a refraction of the historical law through the accidental. In the language of biology, one might say that the historical law is realized through the natural selection of accidents. On this foundation, there develops that conscious human activity which subjects accidents to a process of artificial selection.
But at this point, I must interrupt my account to tell some thing about my friend Ivan Vasllyevich Zaytzev, from the village of Kaloshino, on the river Dubna. This locality is known as Zabolotye (Beyond the Swamps), and, as its name suggests, is rich in wild game. Here the river Dubna floods the country over wide areas. Swamps, lakes, and shallow marshes79, framed by reeds, stretch along in a wide ribbon for almost forty kilometres. In the spring, the place is visited by geese, storks80, ducks of all kinds, curlew, snipe, and all the rest of the swamp brotherhood81. Two kilometres away in the small woods, between hummocks82 of moss83, woodcocks are clucking over the red bilberry shrubs84. With a single short oar85, Ivan Vasilyevich drives his hollow canoe along the narrow furrow86 between the banks of swamp. The furrow had been dug no one knows when, perhaps two or three hundred years or even longer ago, and it must be dredged out every year to prevent its being sucked in. We are obliged to leave Kaloshino at midnight to get to the tent before dawn. With every step, the peat bog87 lifts its wobbling belly88. Once this used to frighten me. But Ivan Vasilyevich said to me on my very first visit: step with out fear, people do get drowned in the lake, but nobody has ever lost his life on the swamp.
The canoe is so light and shaky that it is safer to lie on one’s back motionless, especially if there is a wind blowing. Boatmen usually stand on their knees for safety. Only Ivan Vasilyevich, though lame89 in one leg, stands upright. Ivan Vasilyevich is the duck-lord of these lands. His father, his grandfather, and his great-grandfather were all duck-men. Probably some ancestor of his supplied ducks, geese, and swans to the table of Ivan the Terrible. Zaytzev has no interest in moorcocks, woodcocks, or curlews. “Not of my guild,” he will say cursorily90. But he knows the duck through and through, its feathers, its voice, its soul. Standing91 in his moving boat, Ivan Vasilyevich picks up from the water a feather, then a second and a third, and after looking at them, declares:
“We shall go to Gushcbino, the duck rested there in the evening.”
“How do you know?”
“The feather, you see, floats on the water, it is not soaked yet; a fresh feather: the duck was flying in the evening, and there is no other place she could fly to but Gushchino.”
And so, whereas other sportsmen bring back a brace92 or two, Ivan and I bring five or even eight braces93. His the merit, mine the credit. It often happens so in life. In the reed tent, Ivan Vasilyevich would put his rough palm to his lips and begin quacking94 like a duck, so tenderly that the most cautious drake, shot at many a time, would succumb95 to the spell and come swinging around the tent or alight plop on the water a few paces off, so that one actually felt ashamed to shoot it. Zaytzev notices every thing, knows everything, senses everything. “Get ready,” he whispers to me, “the drake is heading right toward you.” I see the two commas of his wings far off over the woods, but cannot figure out that this is a drake — such mysteries are open only to Ivan Vasilyevich, the great master of the duck-guild. But the drake is really heading toward me. If you miss, Ivan Vasilyevich will emit a low, polite groan96 — but it is better never to have been born than to hear this groan behind you.
Before the war, Zaytzev worked in a textile factory. In the winter he now goes to Moscow to work as a fireman, or in a power station. During the first years after the revolution, battles were going on all over the country, woods and peat-bogs were burning, the fields were bare, and the ducks stopped flying. Zaytzev had his doubts then about the new regime. But after 1920, the ducks came again, this time in hordes97, and Ivan Vasilyevich fully98 recognized the Soviet power.
About two kilometres from here, a small Soviet wick factory ran for a year. Its director was the former chauffeur99 of my military train. Zaytzev’s wife and daughter used to bring home about thirty roubles a month apiece. This was untold100 wealth. But the factory soon supplied the whole district with wicks and then closed down, and the duck again became the basis of the family’s well-being101.
One Mayday, Ivan Vasilyevich found himself in a large Moscow theatre, among the guests of honor on the stage. Ivan Vasilyevich sat in the first row, with his lame leg under him, showing a little embarrassment102 but, as always, a marked dignity, and listened to my report. He had been brought there by Muralov, with whom I usually shared the joys and sorrows of game-shooting. Ivan Vasilyevich was pleased with the report, understood absolutely everything, and recounted it all back at Kaloshino. This cemented the friendship of the three of us even more solidly. It should be noted103 that the old hunters, especially from the parts near Moscow, are all spoiled; they rubbed shoulders with the great of the earth and are masters of flattery, lying, and braggadocio104. But Ivan Vasilyevich is different. He has a great deal of simplicity105, a power of observation, and personal dignity. It is because he is not at heart a trader, but an artist.
Lenin also went hunting with Zaytzev, and Ivan Vasilyevich would always point out the place in a wooden shed where Lenin had lain on the hay. Lenin was passionately23 fond of game hunting, but he rarely went for a hunt. When he did, he usually got excited, in spite of his great self-control in important things. Just as great strategists usually are bad chess-players, so men with a genius for political marksmanship can be mediocre106 shots. I remember how Lenin, almost in despair, as if conscious of some thing that could never be repaired, complained to me of missing a fox at twenty-five paces in a drive-hunt. I understood him, and my heart swelled107 with sympathy.
Lenin and I never had a chance to go hunting together, though we agreed to do so and made firm plans for it many times. In the first years after the revolution, there was generally no time for this sort of thing. Lenin occasionally managed to leave Moscow for the open spaces, but I was hardly ever free of the railway carriage, the staffs, or the automobile108, and I did not once have a shotgun in my hands. And in the later years, after the end of the civil war, something unforeseen was always cropping up to prevent one or the other of us from keeping our agreement. Later on, Lenin’s health began to give away. A short time before he was laid low, we arranged to meet on the river Shosha in Tver province. But Lenin’s automobile got stuck on the country road, and I waited for him in vain. When he recovered from his first stroke, he fought insistently109 to go shooting game. Finally the doctors yielded, on the condition that he not overexert him self. At some agronomic110 conference, Lenin sidled up to Muralov. “You and Trotsky often go game shooting together, don’t you?”
“Sometimes.”
“And do you fare well?”
“Sometimes.”
“Take me with you, will you?”
“But are you allowed to go?” Muralov asks cautiously.
“Of course I am allowed . . . So you will take me?”
“How can I refuse to take you, Vladimir Ilyich?”
“I’ll give you a ring, shall I?”
“We’ll be looking forward to it.”
But Lenin did not ring. His illness rang a second time instead. Then death.
All this digression has been necessary to explain how and why one of the Sundays in October, 1923, found me in Zabolotye, on the bog, among the reeds. There was a slight frost that night and I sat in the tent in felt boots. But in the morning the sun was warm and the bog thawed111. The automobile was waiting for me on the rise of land. The chauffeur, Davydov, with whom I had gone shoulder-to-shoulder throughout the entire civil war, was as usual consumed with impatience112 to learn what game I had. From the canoe to the automobile I had to walk about a hundred steps, not more. But the moment I stepped onto the bog in my felt boots my feet were in cold water. By the time I leaped up to the automobile, my feet were quite cold. Sitting beside Davydov, I took off my boots and tried to warm my feet by the heat of the motor. But the cold got the better of me. I had to stay in bed. After the influenza113, some cryptogenic temperature set in. The doctors ordered me to stay in bed, and thus I spent the rest of the autumn and winter. This means that all through the discussion of “Trotskyism” in 1923, I was ill. One can foresee a revolution or a war, but it is impossible to foresee the consequences of an autumn shooting-trip for wild ducks.
Lenin was laid up at Gorki; I was in the Kremlin. The epigones were widening the circle of the conspiracy. At first they proceeded cautiously and insinuatingly114, adding to their praise ever larger doses of poison. Even Zinoviev, the most impatient of them, surrounded his slander37 with reservations. “The authority of Comrade Trotsky is known to everyone,” Zinoviev was saying at the party conference in Petrograd on December 15, 1923, “as well as his services. In our midst, there is no need of dwelling on it. But errors remain errors. When I erred115, the party pulled me up sharply enough.” And so on, in that cowardly yet aggressive tone that was for so long the one characteristic of the conspirators. Only after a deeper sounding of their ground, and a further occupying of positions, did they grow bolder.
A whole science was created for fabricating artificial reputations, composing fantastic biographies, and boosting the appointed leaders. A special small science was devoted to the question of the honorary presidium. Since October, it had been the custom at the meetings to elect Lenin and Trotsky to the honorary presidium. The combination of these two names was included in every-day speech, in articles, poems, and folk-ditties. It now became necessary to separate the two names, at least mechanically, so that later on it might be possible to pit one against the other politically. Now the presidium began to in chide116 all the members of the Politbureau. Then they began to be placed on the list in alphabetical117 order. Later on, the alphabetical order was abandoned in favor of the new hierarchy118 of leaders. The first place came to be accorded to Zinoviev — in that Petrograd set the example. Some time later, the honorary presidiums would appear here and there without Trotsky at all. Stormy protests from the body of the gathering119 always greeted this, and on occasion the chairman was obliged to explain the omission120 of my name as a mistake. But the newspaper report was of course silent on this point. Then the first place began to be given to Stalin. If the chairman was not clever enough to guess what was required of him, he was invariably corrected in the newspapers. Careers were made and unmade in accordance with the arrangement of names in the honorary presidium. This work, the most persistent121 and systematic122 of all, was justified123 by the necessity of fighting against the “cult33 of the leaders.” At the Moscow conference of January, 1924, Pryeobrazhensky said to the epigones: “Yes, we are against the cult of the leaders, but we are also against practising, instead of the cult of one leader, the cult of others merely of smaller stature.”
“Those were hard days,” my wife writes in her memoirs124, “days of tense fighting for Lev Davydovich at the Politbureau against the rest of the members. He was alone and ill, and had to fight them all. Owing to his illness, the meetings were held in our apartment; I sat in the adjoining bedroom and heard his speeches. He spoke125 with his whole being; it seemed as if with every such speech he lost some of his strength — he spoke with so much ‘blood.’ And in reply, I heard cold, indifferent answers. Everything, of course, had been decided in advance, so what was the need of getting excited? After each of these meetings, L.D.’s temperature mounted; he came out of his study soaked through, and undressed and went to bed. His linen126 and clothes had to be dried as if he had been drenched127 in a rainstorm. At that time, the meetings were frequent and were held in L.D.’s room, whose faded, old carpet appeared in my dream every night in the shape of a live panther: the meetings during the day became nightmares. Such was the first stage of the struggle be fore8 it came out into the open.”
In the later struggle by Zinoviev and Kamenev against Stalin, the secrets of this period were disclosed by the members of the conspiracy themselves. For it was a real conspiracy. A secret political bureau of seven was formed; it comprised all the members of the official Politbureau except me, and included also Kuybyshev, the present chairman of the Supreme128 Economic Council. All questions were decided in advance at that secret centre, where the members were bound by mutual129 vows130. They undertook not to engage in polemics131 against one another and at the same time to seek opportunities to attack me. There were similar centres in the local organizations, and they were connected with the Moscow “seven” by strict discipline. For communication, special codes were used. This was a well-organized illegal group within the party, directed originally against one man. Responsible workers in the party and state were systematically132 selected by the single criterion: Against Trotsky. During the prolonged “interregnum” created by Lenin’s illness, this work was carried on tirelessly but still under cover, so that in the event of Lenin’s recovery, the mined bridges could be preserved intact. The conspirators acted by hints. Candidates for posts were required to guess what was wanted of them. Those who “guessed” went up the ladder. In this war a special “careerism” was developed, which later on received unashamed the name of “anti-Trotakyism.” Lenin’s death freed the conspirators and allowed them to come out into the open. The process of personal selection descended133 a rung lower. It now became impossible to obtain a post as director of a plant, as secretary of a party local, as chairman of a rural executive committee, as bookkeeper or typist, unless one had proved one’s anti-Trotskyism.
The members of the party who raised their voices in protest against this conspiracy became the victims of treacherous134 attacks, made for reasons entirely remote and frequently invented. On the other hand, the morally unstable135 elements, who were being mercilessly driven out of the party during the first five years, now squared themselves by a single hostile remark against Trotsky. From the end of 1923, the same work was carried on in all the parties of the Communist International; certain leaders were dethroned and others appointed in their stead solely136 on the basis of their attitude toward Trotsky. A strenuous137 artificial selection was being effected, a selection not of the best but of the most suitable. The general policy became one of a replacement138 of independent and gifted men by mediocrities who owed their posts entirely to the apparatus139. It was as the supreme expression of the mediocrity of the apparatus that Stalin himself rose to his position.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
influential
|
|
| adj.有影响的，有权势的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
feigned
|
|
| a.假装的，不真诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
tempts
|
|
| v.引诱或怂恿（某人）干不正当的事( tempt的第三人称单数 )；使想要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
friendliness
|
|
| n.友谊，亲切，亲密 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
motives
|
|
| n.动机，目的( motive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
specialty
|
|
| n.(speciality)特性，特质；专业，专长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
fore
|
|
| adv.在前面；adj.先前的；在前部的；n.前部 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
prospect
|
|
| n.前景，前途；景色，视野 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
dwelling
|
|
| n.住宅，住所，寓所 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
amendment
|
|
| n.改正，修正，改善，修正案 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
accusation
|
|
| n.控告，指责，谴责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
accusations
|
|
| n.指责( accusation的名词复数 )；指控；控告；（被告发、控告的）罪名 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
criteria
|
|
| n.标准 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
irreproachable
|
|
| adj.不可指责的，无过失的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
differentiate
|
|
| vi.(between)区分；vt.区别；使不同 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
intrigue
|
|
| vt.激起兴趣，迷住；vi.耍阴谋；n.阴谋，密谋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
advent
|
|
| n.(重要事件等的)到来，来临 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
bourgeois
|
|
| adj./n.追求物质享受的(人)；中产阶级分子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
shrug
|
|
| v.耸肩(表示怀疑、冷漠、不知等) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
compassionately
|
|
| adv.表示怜悯地，有同情心地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
passionately
|
|
| ad.热烈地，激烈地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
modem
|
|
| n.调制解调器 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
chamber
|
|
| n.房间，寝室；会议厅；议院；会所 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
patriotic
|
|
| adj.爱国的，有爱国心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
industrialists
|
|
| n.工业家，实业家( industrialist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
salons
|
|
| n.（营业性质的）店( salon的名词复数 )；厅；沙龙（旧时在上流社会女主人家的例行聚会或聚会场所）；（大宅中的）客厅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
ministries
|
|
| （政府的）部( ministry的名词复数 )； 神职； 牧师职位； 神职任期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
watchful
|
|
| adj.注意的，警惕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
slipper
|
|
| n.拖鞋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
cult
|
|
| n.异教，邪教；时尚，狂热的崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
conspirators
|
|
| n.共谋者，阴谋家( conspirator的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
erase
|
|
| v.擦掉；消除某事物的痕迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
slander
|
|
| n./v.诽谤，污蔑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
slanders
|
|
| 诽谤，诋毁( slander的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
ebb
|
|
| vi.衰退，减退；n.处于低潮，处于衰退状态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
arena
|
|
| n.竞技场，运动场所；竞争场所，舞台 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
helping
|
|
| n.食物的一份&adj.帮助人的，辅助的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
agitators
|
|
| n.（尤指政治变革的）鼓动者( agitator的名词复数 )；煽动者；搅拌器；搅拌机 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
prevailing
|
|
| adj.盛行的；占优势的；主要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
bridled
|
|
| 给…套龙头( bridle的过去式和过去分词 )； 控制； 昂首表示轻蔑（或怨忿等）； 动怒，生气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
exuberance
|
|
| n.丰富；繁荣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
conspiracy
|
|
| n.阴谋，密谋，共谋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
sketch
|
|
| n.草图；梗概；素描；v.素描；概述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
personalities
|
|
| n. 诽谤，（对某人容貌、性格等所进行的）人身攻击； 人身攻击；人格, 个性, 名人( personality的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
epoch
|
|
| n.(新)时代；历元 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
cedes
|
|
| v.让给，割让，放弃( cede的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
pompous
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，自大的；夸大的；豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
panegyrics
|
|
| n.赞美( panegyric的名词复数 )；称颂；颂词；颂扬的演讲或文章 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
54
pane
|
|
| n.窗格玻璃，长方块 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
repels
|
|
| v.击退( repel的第三人称单数 )；使厌恶；排斥；推开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
calumnies
|
|
| n.诬蔑，诽谤，中伤（的话）( calumny的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
insignificant
|
|
| adj.无关紧要的，可忽略的，无意义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
stature
|
|
| n.（高度）水平，（高度）境界，身高，身材 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
slandering
|
|
| [法]口头诽谤行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
corrupter
|
|
| 堕落的，道德败坏的； 贪污的，腐败的； 腐烂的； （文献等）错误百出的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
seething
|
|
| 沸腾的，火热的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
gushes
|
|
| n.涌出，迸发( gush的名词复数 )v.喷，涌( gush的第三人称单数 )；滔滔不绝地说话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
zeal
|
|
| n.热心，热情，热忱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
dedicated
|
|
| adj.一心一意的；献身的；热诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
administrative
|
|
| adj.行政的，管理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
machinery
|
|
| n.(总称)机械，机器；机构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
benighted
|
|
| adj.蒙昧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
outlawry
|
|
| 宣布非法，非法化，放逐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
72
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
Soviet
|
|
| adj.苏联的，苏维埃的；n.苏维埃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
hesitation
|
|
| n.犹豫，踌躇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
vein
|
|
| n.血管，静脉；叶脉，纹理；情绪；vt.使成脉络 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
embalmed
|
|
| adj.用防腐药物保存（尸体）的v.保存（尸体）不腐( embalm的过去式和过去分词 )；使不被遗忘；使充满香气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
corpse
|
|
| n.尸体，死尸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
marshes
|
|
| n.沼泽，湿地( marsh的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
storks
|
|
| n.鹳( stork的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
brotherhood
|
|
| n.兄弟般的关系，手中情谊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
hummocks
|
|
| n.小丘，岗( hummock的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
moss
|
|
| n.苔，藓，地衣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
shrubs
|
|
| 灌木( shrub的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
oar
|
|
| n.桨，橹，划手；v.划行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
furrow
|
|
| n.沟；垄沟；轨迹；车辙；皱纹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
bog
|
|
| n.沼泽；室...陷入泥淖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
belly
|
|
| n.肚子，腹部；(像肚子一样)鼓起的部分，膛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
lame
|
|
| adj.跛的，(辩解、论据等)无说服力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
cursorily
|
|
| adv.粗糙地，疏忽地，马虎地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
brace
|
|
| n. 支柱,曲柄,大括号; v. 绷紧,顶住,(为困难或坏事)做准备 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
braces
|
|
| n.吊带，背带；托架( brace的名词复数 )；箍子；括弧；（儿童）牙箍v.支住( brace的第三人称单数 )；撑牢；使自己站稳；振作起来 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
quacking
|
|
| v.（鸭子）发出嘎嘎声( quack的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
succumb
|
|
| v.屈服，屈从；死 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
groan
|
|
| vi./n.呻吟，抱怨；(发出)呻吟般的声音 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
hordes
|
|
| n.移动着的一大群( horde的名词复数 )；部落 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
chauffeur
|
|
| n.(受雇于私人或公司的)司机；v.为…开车 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
untold
|
|
| adj.数不清的，无数的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
well-being
|
|
| n.安康，安乐，幸福 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
embarrassment
|
|
| n.尴尬；使人为难的人(事物)；障碍；窘迫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
braggadocio
|
|
| n.吹牛大王 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
simplicity
|
|
| n.简单，简易；朴素；直率，单纯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
mediocre
|
|
| adj.平常的，普通的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
swelled
|
|
| 增强( swell的过去式和过去分词 )； 肿胀； （使）凸出； 充满（激情） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
automobile
|
|
| n.汽车，机动车 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
insistently
|
|
| ad.坚持地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
agronomic
|
|
| adj.农艺学的，农事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
thawed
|
|
| 解冻 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
impatience
|
|
| n.不耐烦，急躁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
influenza
|
|
| n.流行性感冒，流感 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
insinuatingly
|
|
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
erred
|
|
| 犯错误，做错事( err的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
chide
|
|
| v.叱责；谴责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
alphabetical
|
|
| adj.字母（表）的，依字母顺序的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
hierarchy
|
|
| n.等级制度；统治集团，领导层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
gathering
|
|
| n.集会，聚会，聚集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
omission
|
|
| n.省略，删节；遗漏或省略的事物，冗长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
persistent
|
|
| adj.坚持不懈的，执意的；持续的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
systematic
|
|
| adj.有系统的，有计划的，有方法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
memoirs
|
|
| n.回忆录；回忆录传( mem,自oir的名词复数) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
linen
|
|
| n.亚麻布，亚麻线，亚麻制品；adj.亚麻布制的，亚麻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
drenched
|
|
| adj.湿透的；充满的v.使湿透( drench的过去式和过去分词 )；在某人（某物）上大量使用（某液体） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
vows
|
|
| 誓言( vow的名词复数 )； 郑重宣布，许愿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
polemics
|
|
| n.辩论术，辩论法；争论( polemic的名词复数 )；辩论；辩论术；辩论法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
systematically
|
|
| adv.有系统地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
descended
|
|
| a.为...后裔的，出身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
treacherous
|
|
| adj.不可靠的，有暗藏的危险的；adj.背叛的，背信弃义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
unstable
|
|
| adj.不稳定的，易变的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
solely
|
|
| adv.仅仅，唯一地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
strenuous
|
|
| adj.奋发的，使劲的；紧张的；热烈的，狂热的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
replacement
|
|
| n.取代，替换，交换；替代品，代用品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
apparatus
|
|
| n.装置，器械；器具，设备 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |