There are people in Italy who can’t stand soccer. Not all Canadians love hockey. A similar situation exists in America, where there are those individuals you may be one of them who yawn or even frown when somebody mentions baseball. 『Baseball to them means boring hours watching grown men in funny tight outfits standing around in a field staring away while very little of anything happens.』① They tell you it’s a game better suited to the 19th century, slow, quiet, gentlemanly. These are the same people you may be one of them who love football because there’s the sport that glorifies “the hit”.
By contrast, baseball seems abstract, cool, silent, still.
On TV the game is fractured into a dozen perspectives, replays, closeups. The geometry of the game, however, is essential to understanding it. You will contemplate the game from one point as a painter does his subject; you may, of course, project yourself into the game. It is in this projection that the game affords so much space and time for involvement. The TV won’t do it for you.
Take, for example, the third baseman. You sit behind the third base dugout and you watch him watching home plate. His legs are apart, knees flexed. His arms hang loose. He does a lot of this. The skeptic still cannot think of any other sports so still, so passive. 『But watch what happens every time the pitcher throws: the third baseman goes up on his toes, flexes his arms or bring the glove to a point in front of him, takes a step right or left, backward or forward, perhaps he glances across the field to check his first baseman’s position.』② Suppose the pitch is a ball. “Nothing happened,” you say. “I could have had my eyes closed.”
The skeptic and the innocent must play the game. And this involvement in the stands is no more intellectual than listening to music is. Watch the third baseman. Smooth the dirt in front of you with one foot; smooth the pocket in your glove; watch the eyes of the batter, the speed of the bat, the sound of horsehide on wood. If football is a symphony of movement and theatre, baseball is chamber music, a spacious interlocking of notes, chores and responses.
1. The passage is mainly concerned with .
A. the different tastes of people for sports
B. the different characteristics of sports
C. the attraction of football
D. the attraction of baseball
2. Those who don’t like baseball may complain that .
A. it is only to the taste of the old
B. it involves fewer players than football
C. it is not exciting enough
D. it is pretentious and looks funny
3.The author admits that .
A. baseball is too peaceful for the young
B. baseball may seem boring when watched on TV
C. football is more attracting than baseball
D. baseball is more interesting than football
4. By stating “I could have had my eyes closed. ” the author means (4th paragraph last sentence):
A. The third baseman would rather sleep than play the game.
B. Even if the third baseman closed his eyes a moment ago, it could make no different to the result.
C. The third baseman is so good at baseball that he could finish the game with eyes closed all the time and do his work well.
D. The consequent was too bad he could not bear to see it.
5. We can safely conclude that the author.
A. likes football B. hates football
C. hates baseball D. likes baseball
1. D主旨题。文章第一段简述了人们对垒球所持的偏见——认为它毫无活力、从容和缓，不像橄榄球那样(禁止)迭起、令人激动。文章的第二、三、四、五段探讨了垒球的根本特征及欣赏角度，文章的最后一句话用一个比喻概括了垒球的魅力：“如果橄榄球是一曲交响乐的话，那么，垒球中所表现出来的运动恰似一曲优美的室内乐。”可见，本文主要探讨的是垒球的特点及其欣赏。 A不对，第一段也确实提到了不同观众对不同运动形式的偏好，但这只是用以引出对垒球的特征及欣赏的讨论。
2. C细节题。文章第一段指出：许多人不喜欢垒球，一提起垒球这些人就打哈欠甚至皱眉头。对他们来说，看垒球意味着眼巴巴地观望着身着运动装(outfit)的人呆立在球场上，东瞧瞧西望望，很少有什么(激动人心的)事发生——没意思透了。他们认为这样的运动更适合上个世纪的人的口味，不像橄榄球那样充满活力。 A意为：“它只适合老年人的口味。”注意：原文说的是适合上个世纪的人的口味，二者意味不一样。 D意为：“它矫揉造作、滑稽可笑。”这与说它gentlemanly(具有绅士风度，矜持，即：没有冲撞或拼抢)不一样。
3. B推断题。第三段指出，在电视上，垒球运动被切换成不同角度的画面，而且不断地使用重放、特写等电视制作技术，这破坏了该运动的整体运动感，使观众无法将自己投入(project)到运动中去，以体会到这种寓动于静的运动之美。电视做不到这一点(The TV won’t do it for you)，因此，电视上的垒球比赛看上去(seems)孤孤单单、冷冷清清、沉沉静静、慢慢腾腾。C、D不对，作者仅指出了不同运动有不同运动的特征，并未说哪种运动优于哪种。参阅文章最后一句。