A few years ago, Charles Barkley got into a lot of trouble for making the observation that sports figures didn't need to be role models. Thousands of fans and professional journalists were cross at this attack on the fundamental principle that the person who jumps highest must aim highest and the person who handles the running back must also be able to deal with life's problems with grace as well.
The problem is not that we look to these people for perfection when they take off their uniforms. It's that we expect anyone to be our representatives for perfection. That's stupid and it makes the rest of us down here lazy.
I get the importance of having heroes, the people who inspire us to cultivate the best potential within us and nurture our better angels. I personally have many heroes, from my mother, Lucy, to my favorite law professor, Howard. But these are personal contacts, people who have-actually touched my hand and my heart, and who occupy a pedestal（基座）built of my own experiences and aspirations. To look at an athlete or an actress with high salary and demand that he or she match our dreams is not only a waste of time, but it's dangerous. The danger comes in how this type of hero worship dehumanizes both the object of affection and the person who blindly adores. That was Barkley's point, not that we should give public figures a pass for being faulty but that we shouldn't abandon our own moral compasses and look to them for true north.
Recently on a television program I participated in, the discussion turned to Kathleen Kane. Someone suggested that the fact that the first female attorney general（首席检察官）in Pennsylvania was really messing things up could have unfortunate consequences for women seeking elected office. I offered the opinion that Kane was unquestionably criticized and that it was not hatred towards woman but incompetence at the root of the attacks. After the show aired, I had people emailing to tell me that I was either a traitor（叛徒）for publicly attacking a fellow female when we need to stand together behind this "role model", or a fool for not going a step further to say that this incompetent lawyer had made it harder for all women to move to the next level.
How depressing! Why should the inferior performance of one woman lead to such diverse but passionate views in people? The answer is obvious: Kane has stopped being an attorney general but has instead become The First Female Attorney General. She can't just make a mistake and pay the normal consequences.
If we stopped trying to live our lives through the accomplishments of public figures, many of whom look and sound like us, we'd learn how to recognize the heroic character of those we might actually know, and the heroic potential within ourselves. Or, perhaps, the honesty to accept our ordinary humanity.
【小题1】Many people were angry with Charles Barkley mainly because________.| A．he broke fundamental principles in life | B．he was not good enough to be a role model |
| C．he doubted the perfection of some sports figures | D．he thought sports figures could have weaknesses |
| A．Because we may let go of our own moral standards. |
| B．Because an athlete or actress cannot match our dreams. |
| C．Because we blindly admire public figures for their faults. |
| D．Because we shouldn't waste time imitating public figures. |
| A．unfairly criticized due to being female | B．the first female attorney general in the US |
| C．less qualified than the public had expected | D．a role model for women seeking elected office |
| A．Be Our Representatives for Perfection | B．Exploration of Our Own Heroic Potential |
| C．Our Unrealistic Expectation of Public Figures | D．Our Conventional Views of Female Politician |
