金融時報:“行萬里路”不會讓你變成更好的人

所屬教程:金融時報原文閱讀

瀏覽:

2022年03月21日

手機版

掃描二維碼方便學(xué)習(xí)和分享

“行萬里路”不會讓你變成更好的人

當我徜徉在里斯本的古城中，漫步在美麗的海岸時，我突然問自己：這一趟旅行讓我悟到了什么嗎？它讓我成了更好的人嗎？答案是沒有。不僅僅是我，即使是身邊那些最資深的旅行家，看起來也并沒有比別人更睿智。“行萬里路”的教誨曾經(jīng)很有意義，但已經(jīng)過時了。

測試中可能遇到的詞匯和知識：

prolific[pr?'l?f?k] adj.多產(chǎn)的，豐富的

correlation[?k?r?'le??n] n.相互關(guān)系，相關(guān)

causation[k??'ze??n] n.因果關(guān)系

complacent[k?m'ple?snt] adj.滿足的，自滿的

bereavement[b?'ri?vm?nt] n.喪親

pretension[pr?'ten?n] n.自命不凡；虛榮

snide[sna?d] adj.諷刺的，嘲弄的

intrepid[?n'trep?d] adj.無畏的，剛毅的

erudition[?eru'd??n] n.博學(xué)

oneness['w?nn?s] n.單一性，同一性

No, travelling isn’t character-building — it’s just fun(764 words)

By Janan Ganesh

A long weekend in Lisbon, for the southern European weather and northern European dynamism. From a base in the old town, I test my calves on uphill walks to districts that qualify the Portuguese capital as Europe’s “in” city, according to the people who decide these things. I eat poorly in tourist traps and exquisitely at the hands of genius chefs. I take in the central monuments and the hidden wonders at the industrial end of the Lisbon shoreline. I put in the hard yards.

Lisbon is a great city that became more not less open to outsiders after the crash. I like it enough to return soon. But did I learn much or emerge an improved person? No. On my travels, I seldom do, and I am not sure that anyone does.

The more of the world I see, the less confident I am that there is anything innately or even generally educational about travel. It is worth doing because it is fun. Travel is for the senses, not the character. Fun is a good enough reason to do anything, as long as we do not kid ourselves that something more profound is at work.

The most prolific travellers I know are not deeper or smarter than anyone else and, if they are, there is more of correlation than of causation in the fact. At worst, travel can make them complacent. They tend to fall on personal anecdote: whatever they saw of a place constitutes the truth. They tend to under-rate the character formation that takes place at home: the break-ups, the bereavements, the mistakes. And our culture tends to flatter their pretensions.

Imagine you are an employer staring at two job applications that are identical in all respects save one. Candidate A spent a year between school and university seeing the world, like a Regency fop on his Grand Tour. Candidate B spent the same year stacking shelves in a local supermarket. One of the hopefuls showed self-reliance, practical nous and a certain grown-upness. The other is Candidate A. Yet ours is still a world that rewards the gap-year itinerant — often funded or backstopped by parents — with the job, where “well-travelled” is still a synonym for “clever”, where sophisticates still cite that snide statistic about the percentage of Americans who have no passport, as though nothing could damn the global superpower more.

Travel has intellectual associations it no longer deserves. It is a hangover from a time when so few went abroad, and so little knowledge about the outside world was accessible to those who did not, that people with a few international excursions under their belt could claim a genuine cultural edge. That innocent time ended when the internet was born. We can now not just read in granular detail about anywhere on earth, but see videos of it in 1,080-pixel definition. Our potential to be surprised — to be educated — by a visit to a place has diminished. I would go as far as to say that anyone who is consistently “discovering” things on their travels is uncurious when at home, not perceptive when abroad.

In the modern world, the only way to learn much more about a place than you could remotely is to live there for a sustained period, paying taxes and using local services. Mere travel is no great source of insight, which leaves just one reason to do it: fun. It is more than enough.

The writer Matthew Parris once told Margaret Thatcher that he planned to visit an island in the Southern Ocean to see the moon and the stars. “Don’t bother, dear,” she said. “You can see the moon and the stars from Spalding.” That stick-in-the-mud line, however funny, is not my argument here. I enjoy travel, including the bits you are meant to hate. I savour the clinical atmosphere of airports, the anonymity of hotels, the productive isolation of long-haul flights. If money were no object, I would go on regular London-to-Sydney trips just to nail big books in one sitting. As my British passport did not come through until my late teens, I could not venture abroad much as a child. I make up for it now.

But precisely because I take so much pleasure from travel, I can see through any attempt to cloak it in virtue. It would be like passing off an enthusiasm for casual sex as an anthropological research project to prove the essential oneness of all strangers. If I tried that line on you, you would laugh me out of town. But if I told you that my Lisbon weekend, a sensory joy, was something deeper, you might entertain the spurious idea.

請根據(jù)你所讀到的文章內(nèi)容，完成以下自測題目：

1.The author believes travel can make people ____.

A. intelligent.

B. conceited.

C. relieved.

D. humble.

答案(1)

2.Why do a lot of employers favour a candidate with rich experience in travelling？

A. Because they believe traveling can help people build a good character.

B. Because they believe traveling can enhance people's problem-solving ability.

C. Because they believe an experienced traveler is more intelligent than average.

D. Because they believe people can take so much pleasure from travel.