As online learning becomes more common and more and more resources are converted to digital form, some people have suggested that public libraries should be shut down and, in their place, everyone should be given an iPad with an e-reader subscription.
Proponents of this idea state that it will save local cities and towns money because libraries are expensive to maintain. They also believe it will encourage more people to read because they won’t have to travel to a library to get a book; they can simply click on what they want to read and read it from wherever they are. They could also access more materials because libraries won’t have to buy physical copies of books; they can simply rent out as many digital copies as they need.
However, it would be a serious mistake to replace libraries with tablets. First, digital books and resources are associated with less learning and more problems than print resources. A study done on tablet vs book reading found that people read 20-30% slower on tablets, retain 20% less information, and understand 10% less of what they read compared to people who read the same information in print. Additionally, staring too long at a screen has been shown to cause numerous health problems, including blurred vision, dizziness, dry eyes, headaches, and eye strain, at much higher instances than reading print does. People who use tablets and mobile devices excessively also have a higher incidence of more serious health issues such as fibromyalgia, shoulder and back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, and muscle strain. I know that whenever I read from my e-reader for too long, my eyes begin to feel tired and my neck hurts. We should not add to these problems by giving people, especially young people, more reasons to look at screens.
Second, it is incredibly narrow-minded to assume that the only service libraries offer is book lending. Libraries have a multitude of benefits, and many are only available if the library has a physical location. Some of these benefits include acting as a quiet study space, giving people a way to converse with their neighbors, holding classes on a variety of topics, providing jobs, answering patron questions, and keeping the community connected. One neighborhood found that, after a local library instituted community events such as play times for toddlers and parents, job fairs for teenagers, and meeting spaces for senior citizens, over a third of residents reported feeling more connected to their community. Similarly, a Pew survey conducted in 2015 found that nearly two-thirds of American adults feel that closing their local library would have a major impact on their community. People see libraries as a way to connect with others and get their questions answered, benefits tablets can’t offer nearly as well or as easily.
While replacing libraries with tablets may seem like a simple solution, it would encourage people to spend even more time looking at digital screens, despite the myriad issues surrounding them. It would also end access to many of the benefits of libraries that people have come to rely on. In many areas, libraries are such an important part of the community network that they could never be replaced by a simple object.
Answer for question 1: Re-enactors will never be able to completely replicate all of the situations and challenges of life in the past. Re-enactors, like historians, suffer limitations that cannot be ignored. A paucity of historical sources, for example, may mean that a recreated regiment can never be certain that its clothes are identical to those worn by troops serving in the regiment in the past. Furthermore, for the reasons of cleanliness and safety, certain characteristics cannot be replicated. Most re-enactment groups attempt to compensate for these inescapable modern effects (such as the use of modern toilets rather than digging a trench and food carried from home rather than scavenged in a nearby village) by striving for a realistic representation in every other manner.
Answer for question 2: In the absence of an audience, mainstream reenactors make an effort to appear real, yet they may fall out of character. Hidden stitches and undergarments may not be period-appropriate, but visible stitches are likely to be made in a period-correct manner. Food served in front of an audience is likely to be historically accurate, although it may not be seasonally or geographically appropriate. Modern things are occasionally utilized "after hours" or in a covert manner. The normal approach is to put on a nice show, but correctness is only required to the extent that others can see it.
Explanation:
Visitors to re-enactment activities obtain an understanding of a particular period. They gain an appreciation of how different life was in the past by simply asking questions, watching how food is prepared over a campfire, and looking at the tents that were used to sleep in. It's a true hands-on experience, since visitors are frequently allowed to sample food, touch uniforms to feel how heavy the cloth is, and learn about the steps involved in firing a musket. Through these contacts with the public, re-enactors pass on their expertise and perspective, making history very accessible. This is what distinguishes re-enactment from more traditional methods of teaching and learning history.
<span>to show that slavery is a terrible practice that has brought misery to too many people
It's clear that he thinks far too many people have been made miserable by slavery when he says "</span><span>that so great a part of it", meaning that so many people of the world have been afflicted by slavery. It's also clear that he thinks it is a terrible practice, as he uses the phrases "bound in chains of darkness and in chains of misery". </span>
