View Single Post
  #10  
Old Thursday, November 12, 2015
khaistahkhan khaistahkhan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Islamabad
Posts: 31
Thanks: 6
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
khaistahkhan is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aniqa hashmi View Post
precis

Beauty can be understand in different ways but in past for Greeks nature was not of interest.They didn’t use their talent and only rely upon bounteous country.although they were blessed with nature’s gift but they considered them a big hurdle in their agriculture.they were also in fear of wild livings.and sea, a source of wealth,they took it as a unvintagable sea.because of these thoughts their dislikes for nature increased.it clearly shows due to these facts Arts couldn’t find its respectable place in Greeks.by the time when Greek Republic ended and people gathered for imperial purposes into Antioch,or Alexandria, or into Rome from that time We find various authors, poets, lyricist,novelists and preachers.

is it fine?
You have over emphasised on subtle things and avoided the important aspect more over there is loose connection in opening and closeing sentences.

"The ancient Greeks didn't portray the beauty of the nature because they were percieving it differently. Auther reasoned it as, the wilde forests and steep cliffs were hinderance to intercourse; harmeful for agriculture; havens for dangerous animals; and rude during natural desasters. Same was the case, initially, with Homer who, unbewared of the worth of the sea, called it mere wastage of the land. All this was due to small population but as the population increased and emerial setup established at Antioch Alaxandria and lastly at Rome and environmental pollution entangled them, they felt value of rural life and thus a large number of artists emerged and started praising beauty of the nature"

Please check it and point out mistakes
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to khaistahkhan For This Useful Post:
Humanist khan (Wednesday, June 17, 2020)