From 1887 onwards, glass making developed from traditional mouth-blowing to a semiautomatic process, after factory- owner HM Ashley introduced a machine capable of
producing 200 bottles per hour in Castleford, Yorkshire, England - more than three times quicker than any previous production method. Then in 1907, the first fully automated machine was developed
in the USA by Michael Owens - founder of the Owens Bottle Machine Company (later the major manufacturers Owens- Illinois) - and installed in its factory. Owens’ invention could
produce an impressive 2,500 bottles per hour Other developments followed rapidly, but it | was not until the First World War when Britain became cut off from essential glass suppliers, that glass
became part of the scientific sector. Previous to this, glass had been seen as a craft rather than a precise science.
1) From our earliest origins, man has been making use of glass. Historians have discovered that a type of natural glass - (1)obsidian - formed in places such as the mouth of a
volcano as a result of the intense heat of an eruption melting sand - was first used as tips for (2)spears. Archaeologists have even found evidence of man-made glass which dates
back to 4000 BC; this took the form of glazes used for coating stone (3) beads. It was not until 1500 BC, however, that the first hollow glass container was made by covering
a sand core with a layer of molten glass.
2) Glass blowing became the most common way to make glass containers from the first century BC. The glass made during this time was highly coloured due to the(4)
impurities of the raw material. In the first century AD, methods of creating colourless glass were developed, which was then tinted by the addition of colouring materials. The secret of
glass making was taken across Europe by the (5)Romans during this century. However, they guarded the skills and technologyrequired to make
glass very closely, and it was not until their empire collapsed in 476 AD that glass-making knowledge became widespread throughout Europe and the Middle East. From the 10th century
onwards, the Venetians gained a reputation for technical skill and artistic ability in the making of glass bottles, and many of the city’s craftsmen left Italy to set up glassworks throughout
Raising the hull of the Mary Rose: Stages one and two
※no more than two words
An important factor in trying to salvage the Mary Rose was that the remaining hull was an open shell. This led to an important decision being taken: namely to carry out the lifting operation in
three very distinct stages. The hull was attachedto a (9)lifting frame via a network of bolts and lifting wires. The problem of the hull being sucked
back downwards into the mud was overcome by using 12 (10)hydraulic jacks. These raised it a few centimetres over a period of several days, as the lifting frame rose
slowly up its four legs. It was only when the hull was hanging freely from the lifting frame, clear of the seabed and the suction effect of the surrounding mud, that the salvage operation
progressed to the second stage. In this stage, the lifting frame was fixed to a hook attached to a crane, and the hull was lifted completely clear of the seabed and transferred underwater into
the lifting cradle. This required precise positioning to locate the legs into the (11)stabbing guides’ of the lifting cradle. (12)The lifting cradle was designed to fit
the hull using archaeological survey drawings, and was fitted with (13)air bags to provide additional cushioning for the hull’s delicate timber framework. The third
and final stage was to lift the entire structure into the air, by which time the hull was also supported from below. Finally, on 11 October 1982, millions of people around the world held their
breath as the timber skeleton of the Mary Rose was lifted clear of the water, ready to be returned home to Portsmouth.
1. In the second paragraph, the writer refers to a shape-matching test in order to illustrate
A the subjective nature of art appreciation.
B the reliance of modern art on abstract forms.
C our tendency to be influenced by the opinions of others.
D a common problem encountered when processing visual data.
2. Angelina Hawley-Dolan’s findings indicate that people
A mostly favour works of art which they know well.
B hold fixed ideas about what makes a good work of art.
C are often misled by their initial expectations of a work of art.
D have the ability to perceive the intention behind works of art.
【第2段落】Could the same approach also shed light on abstract twentieth-century pieces, from Mondrian's geometrical blocks of colour, to Pollock's seemingly haphazard arrangements of splashed paint
on canvas? Sceptics believe that people claim to like such works simply because they are famous. We certainly do have an inclination to follow the crowd. When asked to make
simple perceptual decisions such as matching a shape to its rotated image, for example, people often choose a definitively wrong answer if they see others doing the
same. It is easy to imagine that this mentality would have even more impact on a fuzzy concept like art appreciation, where there is no right or wrong answer.
【第3段落】Angelina Hawley-Dolan, of Boston College, Massachusetts, responded to this debate by asking volunteers to view pairs of paintings - either the creations of famous abstract
artists or the doodles of infants, chimps and elephants. They then had to judge which they preferred. A third of the paintings were given no captions, while many were labelled incorrectly
-volunteers might think they were viewing a chimp's messy brushstrokes when they were actually seeing an acclaimed masterpiece. In each set of trials, volunteers generally preferred the work of
renowned artists, even when they believed it was by an animal or a child. It seems that the viewer can sense the artist's vision in paintings, even if they can't explain why.
i Evidence of innovative environment management practices
ii An undisputed answer to a question about the moai
iii The future of the moai statues
iv A theory which supports a local belief
v The future of Easter Island
vi Two opposing views about the Rapanui people
vii Destruction outside the inhabitants’ control
viii How the statues made a situation worse
ix Diminishing food resources
【A】Easter Island, or Rapu Nui as it is known locally, is home to several hundred ancient human statues - the moai. After this remote Pacific island was settled by the Polynesians, it remained
isolated for centuries. All the energy and resources that went into the moai - some of which are ten metres tall and weigh over 7,000 kilos - came from the island itself. Yet when Dutch explorers
landed in 1722, they met a Stone Age culture. The moai were carved with stone tools, then transported for many kilometres, without the use of animals or wheels, to massive stone platforms. The
identity of the moai builders was in doubt until well into the twentieth century. Thor Heyerdahl, the Norwegian ethnographer and adventurer, thought the statues had been created by pre-Inca
peoples from Peru. Bestselling Swiss author Erich von Daniken believed they were built by stranded extraterrestrials. Modern science - linguistic, archaeological and genetic evidence -
has definitively proved the moai builders were Polynesians, but not how they moved their creations. Local folklore maintains that the statues walked, while researchers have tended to
assume the ancestors dragged the statues somehow, using ropes and logs.
【B】When the Europeans arrived, Rapa Nui was grassland, with only a few scrawny trees. In the 1970s and 1980s, though, researchers found pollen preserved in lake sediments, which proved
the island had been covered in lush palm forests for thousands of years. Only after the Polynesians arrived did those forests disappear. US scientist Jared Diamond believes that the
Rapanui people - descendants of Polynesian settlers - wrecked their own environment. They had unfortunately settled on an extremely fragile island - dry, cool, and too remote to be properly
fertilised by windblown volcanic ash. When the islanders cleared the forests for firewood and farming, the forests didn’t grow back. As trees became scarce and they could no longer construct
wooden canoes for fishing, they ate birds. Soil erosion decreased their crop yields. Before Europeans arrived, the Rapanui had descended into civil war and cannibalism, he maintains. The collapse
of their isolated civilisation, Diamond writes, is a ’worst-case scenario for what may lie ahead of us in our own future’.