霧都孤兒英文讀后感
大約在700字左右……Here I am sitting on a couch alone, thinking about what I have just finished reading with tears of sadness filling my eyes and fire of indignation filling my heart, which revived my exhausted soul that has already been covered by the cruelty and the selfishness of the secular world for a long time. It is truly what I felt after reading Oliver Twist, written by the prominent British author Charles Dickens. The resonance between me and the book makes me feel not only the kindness and the wickedness of all the characters in the novel, but what this aloof society lacks, and what I lack deep inside. These supreme resources I’m talking about right now are somewhat different from minerals, oil that we usually mention. They’re abstract like feelings, and some kinds of spiritual stimulation that all of us desire anxiously from one another —— love and care. Those charitable figures whom Dickens created in the novel are really what we need in life. They showed love and care to others, just as the gentle rain from the sky fell upon the earth, which was carved into my heart deeply. Mr. Brownlow is one such person. The other day he had one of his elaborate watches stolen by two skilled teenage thieves, Artful Dodger and Charley Bates, and thought naturally it was Oliver, who was an orphan and forced to live with a gang of thieves, that had done it because he was the only one near by after the theft had taken place. Being wrathful, he caught Oliver, and sent him to the police station where the ill-tempered, unfair magistrates worked. Fortunately for him, Oliver was proved innocent by one onlooker afterwards. With sympathy, Mr. Brownlow took the injured, poor Oliver to his own home. There Oliver lived freely and gleefully for some months as if he were Mr. Brownlow’s own son. One day, however, Mr. Brownlow asked Oliver to return some books to the bookseller and to send some money for the new books that he had already collected. The thief Oliver once stayed with kidnapped him. After that he disappeared in Mr. Brownlow’s life. Searching for a while, Mr. Brownlow had to believe the fact that he had run away with his money. But dramatically, they came across each other again a few years later. Without hesitation, Mr. Brownlow took Oliver home for the second time not caring if he had done something evil. Perhaps most of us would feel confused about Mr. Brownlow’s reaction. But as a matter of fact, this is just the lesson we should learn from him. Jesus said in the Bible. Forgive not seven times, but seventy-times seven.” Why is that? Because forgiveness is our ability to remove negative thoughts and neutralize them so our energy may be spent on doing what we came here for. We cannot move forward in our future if past issues cloud our thinking. Stop put Mr. Brownlow into the list of your models. Always give people a second chance no matter what they might have done. That’s also a substantial part of loving and caring others. Charles Dickens said:“Love makes the world go around.” These immortal words have inspired and will keep on inspiring us to chant the melody of love and to say the prayer of care forevermore. Let us, therefore, enjoy life and treat other people lovingly. These principles are the roots and foundations of beliefs supporting this article and our mission together. 中文翻我在這里獨(dú)自坐在沙發(fā)上，有我剛剛結(jié)束與悲傷填補(bǔ)我的眼睛，憤怒的火填補(bǔ)我的心，這是恢復(fù)我的疲憊的靈魂已被殘忍和自私覆蓋眼淚閱讀思維世俗的世界很長(zhǎng)一段時(shí)間。
它確實(shí)是我閱讀后感到霧都孤兒，由著名的英國(guó)作家查爾斯狄更斯寫的。
本人與這本書讓我覺得不只是善良和所有小說中的人物，但這個(gè)邪惡超然社會(huì)缺乏，缺少什么我內(nèi)心深處的共鳴。
這些我在談?wù)摤F(xiàn)在的最高礦產(chǎn)資源有所不同，我們通常提到石油。
他們喜歡感受抽象的，某些類型的精神刺激，是我們彼此都渴望 - 愛和關(guān)懷焦急。
那些人狄更斯在小說中創(chuàng)建的慈善數(shù)字是我們?cè)谏钪姓嬲枰裁础?/p>
他們表現(xiàn)出對(duì)他人的愛和關(guān)懷，就像從地上，這是刻在我心里深深地下跌天空細(xì)雨。
布朗洛先生就是這樣一個(gè)人。
有一天，他闡述了他的一個(gè)由兩個(gè)十幾歲的小偷熟練，Artful Dodger的和查理貝茨，被盜手表和思想自然是奧利弗，誰是孤兒，被迫住在盜賊團(tuán)伙，該做了，因?yàn)樗俏ㄒ灰粋€(gè)由盜竊后，已發(fā)生近了。
被憤怒，他抓住奧利弗，并派他去警察局的壞脾氣，不公平的裁判工作。
他幸運(yùn)的是，奧利弗被證明無辜后一個(gè)旁觀者。
同情，布朗洛先生受傷了，可憐的奧利弗自己的家。
有自由，愉快地生活?yuàn)W利弗了幾個(gè)月就好像他是布朗洛先生自己的兒子。
有一天，然而，布朗洛先生問奧利弗回來一些書的書商和發(fā)送的，他已經(jīng)收集到一些錢新書。
小偷奧利弗下榻的一次綁架他。
之后，他消失在布朗洛先生的生命。
搜索了一會(huì)兒，布朗洛先生不得不相信，他與他的錢去運(yùn)行的事實(shí)。
但戲劇性的是，他們碰到對(duì)方又是幾年后。
沒有猶豫，布朗洛先生參加了第二次不回家照顧時(shí)間奧利弗如果他做了邪惡。
也許我們大多數(shù)人會(huì)感到困惑布朗洛先生的反應(yīng)。
但作為一個(gè)事實(shí)上，這只是教訓(xùn)我們應(yīng)該向他學(xué)習(xí)。
耶穌說，在圣經(jīng)。
“原諒不是到七次，但72個(gè)七次。
”為什么會(huì)這樣呢
因?yàn)閷捜菔俏覀冇心芰ο麡O的想法和消滅他們，我們的能源可能在做什么，我們來到這里度過。
我們不能在我們未來的移動(dòng)過去提出的問題，如果我們的思想云。
停止放進(jìn)自己的模型名單布朗洛先生。
總是給人第二次機(jī)會(huì)，無論做什么，他們可能有。
這也是一個(gè)熱愛和關(guān)心他人的很大一部分。
查爾斯狄更斯說：“愛使世界轉(zhuǎn)動(dòng)。
”這些不朽的話語鼓舞和啟發(fā)使我們將于誦愛的旋律，并表示永遠(yuǎn)的祈禱的護(hù)理。
讓我們，所以，享受生活，親切對(duì)待別人。
這些原則是根和信念的基礎(chǔ)支持這篇文章，我們的使命在一起。
霧都孤兒讀后感要英文翻譯
In considering Dickens, as we almost always must consider him, as a man of rich originality, we may possibly miss the forces from which he drew even his original energy. It is not well for man to be alone. We, in the modern world, are ready enough to admit that when it is applied to some problem of monasticism or of an ecstatic life. But we will not admit that our modern artistic claim to absolute originality is really a claim to absolute unsociability; a claim to absolute loneliness. The anarchist is at least as solitary as the ascetic. And the men of very vivid vigour in literature, the men such as Dickens, have generally displayed a large sociability towards the society of letters, always expressed in the happy pursuit of pre-existent themes, sometimes expressed, as in the case of Molière or Sterne, in downright plagiarism. For even theft is a confession of our dependence on society. In Dickens, however, this element of the original foundations on which he worked is quite especially difficult to determine. This is partly due to the fact that for the present reading public he is practically the only one of his long line that is read at all. He sums up Smollett and Goldsmith, but he also destroys them. This one giant, being closest to us, cuts off from our view even the giants that begat him. But much more is this difficulty due to the fact that Dickens mixed up with the old material, materials so subtly modern, so made of the French Revolution, that the whole is transformed. If we want the best example of this, the best example is Oliver Twist. Relatively to the other works of Dickens Oliver Twist is not of great value, but it is of great importance. Some parts of it are so crude and of so clumsy a melodrama, that one is almost tempted to say that Dickens would have been greater without it. But even if be had been greater without it he would still have been incomplete without it. With the exception of some gorgeous passages, both of humour and horror, the interest of the book lies not so much in its revelation of Dickens's literary genius as in its revelation of those moral, personal, and political instincts which were the make-up of his character and the permanent support of that literary genius. It is by far the most depressing of all his books; it is in some ways the most irritating; yet its ugliness gives the last touch of honesty to all that spontaneous and splendid output. Without this one discordant note all his merriment might have seemed like levity. Dickens had just appeared upon the stage and set the whole world laughing with his first great story Pickwick. Oliver Twist was his encore. It was the second opportunity given to him by those who ha rolled about with laughter over Tupman and Jingle, Weller and Dowler. Under such circumstances a stagey reciter will sometimes take care to give a pathetic piece after his humorous one; and with all his many moral merits, there was much that was stagey about Dickens. But this explanation alone is altogether inadequate and unworthy. There was in Dickens this other kind of energy, horrible, uncanny, barbaric, capable in another age of coarseness, greedy for the emblems of established ugliness, the coffin, the gibbet, the bones, the bloody knife. Dickens liked these things and he was all the more of a man for liking them; especially he was all the more of a boy. We can all recall with pleasure the fact that Miss Petowker (afterwards Mrs. Lillyvick) was in the habit of reciting a poem called The Blood Drinker's Burial. I cannot express my regret that the words of this poem are not given; for Dickens would have been quite as capable of writing The Blood Drinker's Burial as Miss Petowker was of reciting it. This strain existed in Dickens alongside of his happy laughter; both were allied to the same robust romance. Here as elsewhere Dickens is close to all the permanent human things. He is close to religion, which has never allowed the thousand devils on its churches to stop the dancing of its bells. He is allied to the people, to the real poor, who love nothing so much as to take a cheerful glass and to talk about funerals. The extremes of his gloom and gaiety are the mark of religion and democracy; they mark him off from the moderate happiness of philosophers, and from that stoicism which is the virtue and the creed of aristocrats. There is nothing odd in the fact that the same man who conceived the humane hospitalities of Pickwick should also have imagined the inhuman laughter of Fagin's den. They are both genuine and they are both exaggerated. And the whole human tradition has tied up together in a strange knot these strands of festivity and fear. It is over the cups of Christmas Eve that men have always competed in telling ghost stories. This first element was present in Dickens, and it is very powerfully present in Oliver Twist. It had not been present with sufficient consistency or continuity in Pickwick to make it remain on the reader's memory at all, for the tale of Gabriel Grubb is grotesque rather than horrible, and the two gloomy stories of the Madman and the Queer Client are so utterly irrelevant to the tale, that even if the reader remember them he probably does not remember that they occur in Pickwick. Critics have complained of Shakespeare and others for putting comic episodes into a tragedy. It required a man with the courage and coarseness of Dickens actually to put tragic episodes into a farce. But they are not caught up into the story at all. In Oliver Twist, however, the thing broke out with an almost brutal inspiration, and those who had fallen in love with Dickens for his generous buffoonery may very likely have been startled at receiving such very different fare at the next helping. When you have bought a man's book because you like his writing about Mr. Wardle's punch-bowl and Mr. Winkle's skates, it may very well be surprising to open it and read about the sickening thuds that beat out the life of Nancy, or that mysterious villain whose face was blasted with disease. As a nightmare, the work is really admirable. Characters which are not very clearly conceived as regards their own psychology are yet, at certain moments, managed so as to shake to its foundations our own psychology. Bill Sikes is not exactly a real man, but for all that he is a real murderer. Nancy is not really impressive as a living woman; but (as the phrase goes) she makes a lovely corpse. Something quite childish and eternal in us, something which is shocked with the mere simplicity of death, quivers when we read of those repeated blows or see Sikes cursing the tell-tale cur who will follow his bloody foot-prints. And this strange, sublime, vulgar melodrama, which is melodrama and yet is painfully real, reaches its hideous height in that fine scene of the death of Sikes, the besieged house, the boy screaming within, the crowd screaming without, the murderer turned almost a maniac and dragging his victim uselessly up and down the room, the escape over the roof, the rope swiftly running taut, and death sudden, startling and symbolic; a man hanged. There is in this and similar scenes something of the quality of Hogarth and many other English moralists of the early eighteenth century. It is not easy to define this Hogarthian quality in words, beyond saying that it is a sort of alphabetical realism, like the cruel candour of children. But it has about it these two special principles which separate it from all that we call realism in our time. First, that with us a moral story means a story about moral people; with them a moral story meant more often a story about immoral people. Second, that with us realism is always associated with some subtle view of morals; with them realism was always associated with some simple view of morals. The end of Bill Sikes exactly in the way that the law would have killed him -- this is a Hogarthian incident; it carries on that tradition of startling and shocking platitude. All this element in the book was a sincere thing in the author, but none the less it came from old soils, from the graveyard and the gallows, and the lane where the ghost walked. Dickens was always attracted to such things, and (as Forster says with inimitable simplicity) but for his strong sense might have fallen into the follies of spiritualism. As a matter of fact, like most of the men of strong sense in his tradition, Dickens was left with a half belief in spirits which became in practice a belief in bad spirits. The great disadvantage of those who have too much strong sense to believe in supernaturalism is that they keep last the low and little forms of the supernatural, such as omens, curses, spectres, and retributions, but find a high and happy supernaturalism quite incredible. Thus the Puritans denied the sacraments, but went on burning witches. This shadow does rest, to some extent, upon the rational English writers like Dickens; supernaturalism was dying, but its ugliest roots died last. Dickens would have found it easier to believe in a ghost than in a vision of the Virgin with angels. There, for good or evil, however, was the root of the old diablerie in Dickens, and there it is in Oliver Twist. But this was only the first of the new Dickens elements, which must have surprised those Dickensians who eagerly bought his second book. The second of the new Dickens elements is equally indisputable and separate. It swelled afterwards to enormous proportions in Dickens's work; but it really has its rise here. Again, as in the case of the element of diablerie, it would be possible to make technical exceptions in favour of Pickwick. Just as there were quite inappropriate scraps of the gruesome element in Pickwick, so there are quite inappropriate allusions to this other topic in Pickwick. But nobody by merely reading Pickwick would even remember this topic; no one by merely reading Pickwick would know what this topic is; this third great subject of Dickens; this second great subject of the Dickens of Oliver Twist. This subject is social oppression. It is surely fair to say that no one could have gathered from Pickwick how this question boiled in the blood of the author of Pickwick. There are, indeed, passages, particularly in connection with Mr. Pickwick in the debtor's prison, which prove to us, looking back on a whole public career, that Dickens had been from the beginning bitter and inquisitive about the problem of our civilisation. No one could have imagined at the time that this bitterness ran in an unbroken river under all the surges of that superb gaiety and exuberance. With Oliver Twist this sterner side of Dickens was suddenly revealed. For the very first pages of Oliver Twist are stern even when they are funny. They amuse, but they cannot be enjoyed, as can the passages about the follies of Mr. Snodgrass or the humiliations of Mr. Winkle. The difference between the old easy humour and this new harsh humour is a difference not of degree but of kind. Dickens makes game of Mr. Bumble because he wants to kill Mr. Bumble; he made game of Mr. Winkle because he wanted him to live for ever. Dickens has taken the sword in hand; against what is he declaring war? It is just here that the greatness of Dickens comes in; it is just here that the difference lies between the pedant and the poet. Dickens enters the social and political war, and the first stroke he deals is not only significant but even startling. Fully to see this we must appreciate the national situation. It was an age of reform, and even of radical reform; the world was full of radicals and reformers; but only too many of them took the line of attacking everything and anything that was opposed to some particular theory among the many political theories that possessed the end of the eighteenth century. Some had so much perfected the perfect theory of republicanism that they almost lay awake at night because Queen Victoria had a crown on her head. Others were so certain that mankind had hitherto been merely strangled in the bonds of the State that they saw truth only in the destruction of tariffs or of by-laws. The greater part of that generation held that clearness, economy, and a hard common-sense, would soon destroy the errors that had been erected by the superstitions and sentimentalities of the past. In pursuance of this idea many of the new men of the new century, quite confident that they were invigorating the new age, sought to destroy the old entimental clericalism, the old sentimental feudalism, the old-world belief in priests, the old-world belief in patrons, and among other things the old-world belief in beggars. They sought among other things to clear away the old visionary kindliness on the subject of vagrants. Hence those reformers enacted not only a new reform bill but also a new poor law. In creating many other modern things they created the modern workhouse, and when Dickens came out to fight it was the first thing that he broke with his battle-axe. This is where Dickens's social revolt is of more value than mere politics and avoids the vulgarity of the novel with a purpose. His revolt is not a revolt of the commercialist against the feudalist, of the Nonconformist against the Churchman, of the Free-trader against the Protectionist, of the Liberal against the Tory. If he were among us now his revolt would not be the revolt of the Socialist against the Individualist, or of the Anarchist against the Socialist. His revolt was simply and solely the eternal revolt; it was the revolt of the weak against the strong. He did not dislike this or that argument for oppression; he disliked oppression. He disliked a certain look on the face of a man when he looks down on another man. And that look on the face is, indeed, the only thing in the world that we have really to fight between here and the fires of Hell. That which pedants of that time and this time would have called the sentimentalism of Dickens was really simply the detached sanity of Dickens. He cared nothing for the fugitive explanations of the Constitutional Conservatives; he cared nothing for the fugitive explanations of the Manchester School. He would have cared quite as little for the fugitive explanations of the Fabian Society or of the modern scientific Socialist. He saw that under many forms there was one fact, the tyranny of man over man; and he struck at it when he saw it, whether it was old or new. When he found that footmen and rustics were too much afraid of Sir Leicester Dedlock, he attacked Sir Leicester Dedlock; he did not care whether Sir Leicester Dedlock said he was attacking England or whether Mr. Rouncewell, the Ironmaster, said he was attacking an effete oligarchy. In that case he pleased Mr. Rouncewell, the Ironmaster, and displeased Sir Leicester Dedlock, the Aristocrat. But when he found that Mr. Rouncewell's workmen were much too frightened of Mr. Rouncewell, then he displeased Mr. Rouncewell in turn; he displeased Mr. Rouncewell very much by calling him Mr. Bounderby. When he imagined himself to be fighting old laws he gave a sort of vague and general approval to new laws. But when he came to the new laws they had a bad time. When Dickens found that after a hundred economic arguments and granting a hundred economic considerations, the fact remained that paupers in modern workhouses were much too afraid of the beadle, just as vassals in ancient castles were much too afraid of the Dedlocks, then he struck suddenly and at once. This is what makes the opening chapters of Oliver Twist so curious and important. The very fact of Dickens's distance from, and independence of, the elaborate financial arguments of his time, makes more definite and dazzling his sudden assertion that he sees the old human tyranny in front of him as plain as the sun at noon-day. Dickens attacks the modern workhouse with a sort of inspired simplicity as a boy in a fairy tale who had wandered about, sword in hand, looking for ogres and who had found an indisputable ogre. All the other people of his time are attacking things because they are bad economics or because they are bad politics, or because they are bad science; he alone is attacking things because they are bad. All the others are Radicals with a large R; he alone is radical with a small one. He encounters evil with that beautiful surprise which, as it is the beginning of all real pleasure, is also the beginning of all righteous indignation. He enters the workhouse just as Oliver Twist enters it, as a little child. This is the real power and pathos of that celebrated passage in the book which has passed into a proverb; but which has not lost its terrible humour even in being hackneyed. I mean, of course, the everlasting quotation about Oliver Twist asking for more. The real poignancy that there is in this idea is a very good study in that strong school of social criticism which Dickens represented. A modern realist describing the dreary workhouse would have made all the children utterly crushed, not daring to speak at all, not expecting anything, not hoping anything, past all possibility of affording even an ironical contrast or a protest of despair. A modern, in short, would have made all the boys in the workhouse pathetic by making them all pessimists. But Oliver Twist is not pathetic because he is a pessimist. Oliver Twist is pathetic because he is an optimist. The whole tragedy of that incident is in the fact that he does expect the universe to be kind to him, that he does believe that he is living in a just world. He comes before the Guardians as the ragged peasants of the French Revolution came before the Kings and Parliaments of Europe. That is to say, he comes, indeed, with gloomy experiences, but he comes with a happy philosophy. He knows that there are wrongs of man to be reviled; but he believes also that there are rights of man to be demanded. It has often been remarked as a singular fact that the French poor, who stand in historic tradition as typical of all the desperate men who have dragged down tyranny, were, as a matter of fact, by no means worse off than the poor of many other European countries before the Revolution. The truth is that the French were tragic because they were better off. The others had known the sorrowful experiences; but they alone had known the splendid expectation and the original claims. It was just here that Dickens was so true a child of them and of that happy theory so bitterly applied. They were the one oppressed people that simply asked for justice; they were the one Parish Boy who innocently asked for more. （你可以抄其中幾段）
霧都孤兒讀后感，要英文的，而且有中文翻譯。
霧都孤兒讀后感500字（一） 這次的作文是寫外國(guó)名著的讀后感，我剛好看了霧都孤兒，對(duì)于里面的事情，我真的很感動(dòng)： 我前幾天看了一本書，叫《霧都孤兒》，《霧都孤兒》這本書試一個(gè)大作家創(chuàng)作的，這個(gè)作家名叫狄更斯，《霧都孤兒》是他的第二部長(zhǎng)篇小說，又名《奧利弗·退斯特》這本書的作者在書中寫到：本書的一個(gè)目的，就是追求無情的真實(shí)，這本書我反復(fù)的讀了很多遍，才真正理解他。
這本書講述了一個(gè)動(dòng)人的故事，書中的主人公叫奧利弗特維斯特。
他出生在于濟(jì)貧院，剛出生不久，他媽媽就去世了，他過著艱苦的生活，他知道什么是正義，什么是邪惡，他被當(dāng)作一個(gè)物品似的，被人拋來拋去的，送來送去，但是他并沒有想自殺，而是堅(jiān)強(qiáng)的，勇敢的活了下來，有一次，他誤入了強(qiáng)盜公司，小偷們想把他訓(xùn)練成一個(gè)小偷，但他不愿意作小偷，就逃了出來，這集的他才10歲，他寧愿逃出，也不愿意做一名小偷，他是一個(gè)多么正義的孩子呀，面對(duì)生死關(guān)頭，他最終還是選擇了正義，他的正義和勇敢，恐怕我們誰也比不上他，他一個(gè)人經(jīng)歷著這么多的折磨，這么多的這么巨大的痛苦，但他還是堅(jiān)持的追求美好的生活，他的生活那么苦，那么我們這些生活在蜜罐里的人抐
我們總是不滿足，總是在抱怨，可是他沒有來抱怨，我們有父母在，有健健康康的父母，但是我還一天跟我的爸媽吵架，有些失去雙親的人，就連跟自己的爸媽說一句話的機(jī)會(huì)還沒有，我想我應(yīng)該好好反省下自己… 看了這本書，我深深的體會(huì)到：我真的很幸福。
霧都孤兒讀后感500字（二） 這個(gè)寒假我讀了幾本故事書，印象最深刻的就是英國(guó)作家狄更斯的第一部偉大小說《霧都孤兒》。
故事講述的是一個(gè)名叫奧力弗。
退斯特的棄嬰在孤兒院里被悲慘地教育了9年，然后又被送到棺材老板那兒當(dāng)學(xué)徒。
由于難以忍受的饑餓和暴力以及侮辱，他逃亡倫敦。
又不幸誤入賊窩，期間被一位善良的的老紳士班布爾先生收留。
但又被那一伙賊綁回賊窩。
最后善良的女扒手南希為了營(yíng)救奧利弗，不顧賊頭的監(jiān)視和威脅，向班布爾報(bào)信，說奧利弗就是他尋找已久的外孫兒。
南希被賊窩頭目殺害，警察隨即圍剿了賊窩。
奧利弗終于得以與親人團(tuán)聚。
讀《霧都孤兒》這本書時(shí)，有幾次被故事情節(jié)深深的感動(dòng)，這不僅是因?yàn)閵W立弗的悲慘遭遇牽動(dòng)了我的心，更是因?yàn)樗麚碛猩屏嫉谋拘?，擁有一顆感恩的心。
他雖然在黑暗的社會(huì)里飽嘗了人世間的艱苦，但是這些并沒有給自己美好的心靈蒙上半點(diǎn)塵埃。
這本小說熱情謳歌人們的正直、善良，揭露了當(dāng)時(shí)英國(guó)社會(huì)的一些陰暗和丑陋的一面。
整本小說充滿了愛的力量。
與奧立弗相比，我的生活是多么的幸福，有爸爸媽媽的呵護(hù)與疼愛，衣食無憂。
有慈愛的老師和親密的伙伴。
但有時(shí)還不滿足，遇到困難就退縮。
讀了奧立弗的故事，使我懂得了要珍惜今天的美好生活，刻苦努力地學(xué)習(xí)，長(zhǎng)大以后回報(bào)社會(huì)。
霧都孤兒讀后感500字（三） 初次接觸到《霧都孤兒》這本書，是在這個(gè)寒假，書中主人公多舛的命運(yùn)及那些居心叵測(cè)的人、那個(gè)丑惡的社會(huì)，在我腦海中揮之不去。
《霧都孤兒》講述的是主人公奧利弗·特威斯特一個(gè)孤兒悲慘的身世及遭遇。
()他一出生，母親就撒手人寰，在孤兒院長(zhǎng)大，經(jīng)歷學(xué)徒生涯，艱苦逃難，誤入賊窩，歷盡無數(shù)辛酸，不向惡勢(shì)力低頭，最后在善良的紳士布朗洛先生的幫助下，查明身世并獲得了幸福。
讀完《霧都孤兒》這本書，我深深地被主人公奧利弗的精神所感動(dòng)、所欽佩。
其中最令我感動(dòng)的是奧利弗在賊窟的那段經(jīng)歷。
可憐的奧利弗本來就已經(jīng)承受著沒有親人的痛苦，瘦小的他卻有著一顆堅(jiān)強(qiáng)的心。
他被迫被訓(xùn)練偷竊，卻堅(jiān)持不偷竊他人的財(cái)物。
他不肯向惡勢(shì)力低頭，在那個(gè)黑暗的年代，一個(gè)僅10歲的孩童，擁有正義、勇敢、堅(jiān)毅
他寧愿在街頭流落，受盡旁人的冷眼去乞討，也不愿去失竊他人的勞動(dòng)果實(shí)。
雖然生活在困苦的環(huán)境中，但內(nèi)心充滿對(duì)未來的憧憬，對(duì)美好生活的向往。
我不得不為奧利弗堅(jiān)強(qiáng)不屈的精神肅然起敬。
與奧利弗那時(shí)的生活的困苦相比，現(xiàn)在的我過的是豐衣足食，衣來伸手，飯來張口的生活，我沒有理由不珍惜所擁有的一切。
我們更應(yīng)該從小樹立遠(yuǎn)大的目標(biāo)，好好學(xué)習(xí)，將來回報(bào)社會(huì)。
如今，奧利弗的動(dòng)蕩、困苦的年代已不復(fù)存在。
可我們知道，世界上還依然有很多的孩子在經(jīng)受著戰(zhàn)亂的傷害，飽受著饑荒的痛苦，怎能漠視這一切
我們應(yīng)該盡已所能的去幫助那些生活悲苦的人們。
霧都孤兒讀后感英文版
Oliver TwistAfter reading this book, in my mind a long time can not quell. Poor Oliver, already suffering under the loss of family members, but also has been so much torment.I really do not know, under his thin body, has what will enable him to persevere, so that he was hungry, cold, loneliness, sadness, suffering under the tenacious struggle.Oliver suffers great pain, but his yearning for a better life, longing for life is to support the strength of his progress!We live in a honey jar, Fuk nest, they are still complaining, always satisfied.But we have thought that in the world, there are many children, are suffering great pain; positive and hunger, cold, disease, war; are facing loss of their loved ones, wandering street life.And like them as living things, should we be able to see them? No, we can not! Let us hands and brain, to help them to satisfy their thirst for life!
什么是英語書蟲名著
“書蟲”叢書“書蟲”是外語教學(xué)與研究出版社和牛津大學(xué)出版社共同奉獻(xiàn)給廣大英語學(xué)習(xí)者的一大精品。
如今這只“書蟲”漂洋過海，輕盈地落在了中國(guó)英語學(xué)習(xí)者的掌中。
“書蟲”首先將給你自信，即使你目前只有幾百的詞匯量，也可以不太費(fèi)勁地閱覽世界名作了。
書蟲還會(huì)用它細(xì)細(xì)的鳴叫聲不停地提醒你：要堅(jiān)持不懈地讀下去，要廣泛而豐富地讀下去。
待到讀完叢書系列中的最后一本，你也許會(huì)突然發(fā)現(xiàn)：你已經(jīng)如蛹畫碟，振翅欲翔了
“書蟲”系列叢書主要用于英語閱讀的啟蒙和提高。
中英雙語對(duì)照閱讀，提高閱讀量，擴(kuò)增單詞量。
建議初學(xué)者能熟練的掌握3-5本，通讀100本左右。
對(duì)英語的提高很有好處。
第一級(jí)：300生詞量，適合初一、初二學(xué)生，分上、下兩冊(cè)，共20本 上冊(cè)： 1、《愛情與金錢》 2、《蘇格蘭瑪麗女王》 3、《在月亮下面》 4、《潘德爾的巫師》 5、《歌劇院的幽靈》 6、《猴爪》 7、《象人》 8、《世界上最冷的地方》 9、《阿拉丁和神燈》 10、《別了，好萊塢先生》 下冊(cè) 1、《小公主》 2、《邦蒂號(hào)暴動(dòng)》 3、《奧米茄文件》 4、《誰謀殺了總統(tǒng)》 5、《福爾摩斯和公爵的兒子》 6、《白色死亡》 7、《綠野仙蹤》 8、《難忘米蘭達(dá)》 9、《福爾摩斯與賽馬》 10、《湯姆·索亞歷險(xiǎn)記》 第二級(jí)：600生詞量，適合初二、初三學(xué)生，8本 1、《威廉·莎士比亞》 2、《一個(gè)國(guó)王的愛情故事》 3、《亡靈島》 4、《哈克貝利·費(fèi)恩歷險(xiǎn)記》 5、《魯賓孫漂流記》 6、《愛麗絲漫游奇境記》 7、《格林·蓋布爾斯來的安妮》 8、《五個(gè)孩子和沙精》 第三級(jí)：1000生詞量，適合初三、高一學(xué)生，分上冊(cè)7本，下冊(cè)8本 上冊(cè) 1、《弗蘭肯斯坦》 2、《野性的呼喚》 3、《秘密花園》 4、《曾達(dá)的囚徒》 5、《愛麗絲鏡中世界奇遇記》 6、《風(fēng)語河岸柳》 7、《神秘幻想故事集》 下冊(cè)： 1、《圣誕歡歌》 2、《多里安·格雷的畫像》 3、《勃朗特一家的故事》 4、《牙齒和爪子》 5、《星際動(dòng)物園》 6、《誘拐》 7、《公正》 8、《化學(xué)秘密》 第四級(jí)：1500生詞量，適合高一、高二學(xué)生，分上冊(cè)5本，下冊(cè)6本 上冊(cè)： 1、《巴斯克維爾獵犬》 2、《不平靜的墳?zāi)埂? 3、《三怪客泛舟記》 4、《三十九級(jí)臺(tái)階》 5、《小婦人》 下冊(cè)： 1、《黑駿馬》 2、《織工馬南》 3、《雙城記》 4、《格列佛游記》 5、《金銀島》 6、《化身博士》 第五級(jí)：2000生詞量，適合高二、高三學(xué)生，共4本。
1、《遠(yuǎn)大前程》 2、《大衛(wèi)·科波菲爾》 3、《呼嘯山莊》 4、《遠(yuǎn)離塵囂》 5、《理智與情感》 6、《園會(huì)》 第六級(jí)：2300生詞量，適合高三、大學(xué)低年級(jí)學(xué)生，共4本 1、《簡(jiǎn)·愛》 2、《霧都孤兒》 3、《傲慢與偏見》 4、《苔絲》 5、《白衣女人》 入門級(jí)：適合小學(xué)高年級(jí),初一共十本 1 《生存游戲》 2《俠盜羅賓漢 》 3《白色巨石》 4《紅酋長(zhǎng)的贖金》 5《吸血鬼獵手 》 6《逆戟鯨》 7《霧都疑案》 8《亞瑟王傳奇》 9《亞瑟王朝里的美國(guó)人》 10《把錢拿出來》建議你根據(jù)自己的年級(jí)選擇一本閱讀，里面是中英對(duì)照的，不是很難，如果需要幫忙，可以聯(lián)系我，給我留言就可以了。
