Hope you guys can help me out with this essay for GRE. I have no idea about it, as I’m just trying to prepare for it on my own :oops:
Thanks a bunch for your help!!! 
Give your perspective on the issue below:
Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society’s past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such situation, modern developments should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be served.
To any society, the preservation of historic buildings is of great importance, because these are places where people’s colorful past is recaptured. Still, the shrinking land budget of people in modern days has posed a threat to the ground on which these old buildings now stand. On judging this situation, it is reasonable that modern development is given the prestige over historic buildings.
It should be agreed that old buildings are meaningful to citizens in a community. Thanks to them, people can trace back to their origin and other miracles in primitive time. Following the chronological order of a city’s old buildings, a person can realize the rungs of evolution, as well as the lifestyles, thoughts and beliefs clearly shown through these artifacts. Moreover, each building has a unique architectural structure, which reminds new generations of their ancestors’ creative endeavor, therefore serves a far – fetched educational purpose.
On the other hand, there occur new problems, which did not even exist in the past. These range from overpopulation, flourished commercial activities to national security.
While the population keeps rocketing over years, especially in developing areas, old buildings seem to have little practical use. They either occupy too much land for their surroundings, or require countless money for maintenance and restoration. It is a wise idea for the authority then, to put its citizens’ rights and daily needs first.
This is also the case when old buildings become hindrances to the society’s infrastructure. Some hundreds years ago, people could hardly expect industries, among those outstood domestic and foreign trading business, to prosper at such a thrilling speed as nowadays. This naturally leads to changes of constructions in the whole society. Only when this demand is met can the economy be stabilized, and then manipulated. This, in its turn, results in a heightened living standard for almost all residents.
On balance, despite their tremendous historical value, old buildings should be preceded by modern development under certain circumstances. This is to ensure a radical improvement for the community. It is recommended, though, to group records and remnants of these obsolete constructions in museums, where they would still undertake their sacred missions with future generations.
Would you please give me some comments on this piece? Hope it’s not that bad 
Many thanks!
Hello Everybody,
Its first time for me, pls rate this essay.
“Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society’s past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such situations, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be served.”
Like every coin has two sides, history and future are also similar, we are serving as the bridge between them. We are honored to be that connecting link between two civilizations. History has provided us so many things to cherish and one of them is the buildings, of historical importance, the great monuments on which every country feel proud.Most people would agree that building s represent a valuable importance for the society’s past, but controversy arises when old building stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. This is a crucial point of consideration, whom should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings.
The old building that is still standing in the middle of the city, shines and shines bright and tall. My grandfather used to tell me different stories about that particular building because he is watching it since his childhood. It sounds great to be close to something of such historical and archaic value. To witness its hugeness and its greatness but also the other darker and gloomy side makes me feel sad at the same time. When I see people playing with historical legendry piece makes not only me but others also sad.
As the human population is growing heaps and bound, and in a developing country now there is shortage of living space, in this scenario keeping old monuments is not only difficult but sometimes sonds of no value. If we don’t have proper arrangements for our countrymen then what is the use of keeping those old huge creatures who have lost there lustour, their beauty and use. They are just standing and have occupied a lot of space. Maintenance of these cost millions per year.
Now in modern society when everybody prefers to live in a wellplanned and well constructed city,this kind of historical places sometimes creates hinderance in planning and ultimately in execution of a well planned city. Earlier in ancient time when kings and queens had limited arena to focus on, they preferd construction of buildings, tombs,temples,churches and such creatures which were actually of very limited use but of historical importance and definitely the main purpose was to preserve the art and culture of those time and to pass it on to the next generation.They are proof of those immaculate artists who used no great machines to build such things. History has provided us lots of such things to feel proud on. Like tajmahal of India, greatwall of china, statue of liberty USA,leaning tower of pisa. Italy and lots of such mentionable creatures.
There is a famous quote by Thomas Jefferson,” I like the dreams of future better than the history of the past.” In modern society when the means of transport,housing facilities, shoping malls, schools,playgrounds everything has developed a lot, infact beyond imagination, we can not loose any upcoming good plans just because of some old, feeble, quainted building as it holds some historical importance. Definitely some sort of solution has to sorted out for this.
Today we are mainly responsible for the proper facilities should be provided to our generations and upcoming generations,instead of keeping old memories and spending lots of moey on that. These buildings definitely brings lots of tourists, which is monitary very beneficial for any country specially a developing one,but this is the time to think are we really doing justice towards those people who are finding it so hard to earn a single time bread? They need food, shelter, education and basic necessities to be fulfilled, but our government is bound to spend so much money on maintenance of those buildings which are helping nothng. Instaed government can do something for those poor people.
To summarize, the historical buildins are of great value to humanking but whenever any thing comes in the path of development should be removed but keeping the importance of that also in mind.
Hello everybody,
this is my first argument pls rate this.
“Over the past few years, the number of people who have purchased advance tickets for the Glenville Summer Concert series has declined, indicating lack of community support. Although the weather has been unpredictable in the past few years, this cannot be the reason for the decline in advance ticket purchases, because many people attended the concerts even in bad weather. Clearly, then, the reason for the decline is the choice of music, so the organizers of the concert should feature more modern music in the future and should be sure to include music composed by Richerts, whose recordings Glenville residents purchase more often than any other contemporary recordings. This strategy will undoubtedly increase advance ticket purchases and will increase attendance at the concerts.”
So many concerts are organized around the world, in different weather conditions, different seasons and many a times they turn out to be a fiasco.There can be numerous reasons behind that.The author has claimed that in a community named Galville the purchase of advance ticket has reduced, due to lack of community harmony ,lack of proper music, not including modern music and she suggests that by including Richerts music this problem can be solved.
The number of purchase of advance tickets has reduced, which does not claim that the overall ticket purchase has reduced. This is absolutely fallacious to think that the reason behind this is lack of community support. The author has clearly mentioned that the weather is unpredictable and this could be the possible reason of reduction in advance ticket purchase. This statement that many people have attended concerts even in bad weather is erroneous as the author is just making an assumption that people are so fond of that music that they came even in bad weather, probably they forced themselves to go as they would have purchased the ticket in advance.
The other assumption which author has made is “ the choice of music”, as there is no such data or any survey report is available, one can not rely on this statement. Author simply assumend that organizers should include modern music in future.
No doubt author is very much concerned about the concert and public interest but the statements are ambiguous and misleading. Author has mentioned that Glenville residents purchase more records of Richerts than any other music but again this is not supported by any kind of data. Author recommends that organizers should definitely include Richerts music in the concert due to his popularity in that community, sounds very roseate but is not supported by any kind of data.
Author thinks that if Richerts and much more modern music is included in concert, it will result in increase of advance tickets purchase and will increase the attendance at the concert. This is very ambiguous and hard to fathom. There is possibility that even after that people might prefer to purchase tickets on concert day depending on weather conditions and other plausible reasons. It would have been appreciable if author had included the other possible and feasible solution for this problem like,If organizers arrange for the concert in some favorable season may be spring or summer, there is possibility of increase in ticket purchase. Or if the organizers had opted some better advertising and promotional schemes, purchase of tickets might have increased.
The author has come up with a problem along with a possible solution which are mostly based on her assumptions, generalizations and false causes. If she could have produced some proof, supporting her assumptions there is a possibility that her words could have been accepted but due to lack of these things,she lags in convincing readers.
Anybody pls read it and rate it honestly.