刷题刷出新高度，偷偷领先！偷偷领先！偷偷领先！ 关注我们，悄悄成为最优秀的自己！
单选题
The royal archives are a treasury of documents of national and international importance that stretch back over 250 years, from George III to the present queen.For this reason alone, the collections belong in the public domain,something the royal archivists recognized with their decision to put Queen Victoria's journals online.But it should not be for the royal archivists to decide on an arbitrary basis what can be seen and what cannot.Like the National Archives—perhaps even as part of it—there should be a transparent process through which royal documents relating to state affairs are generally available.
The current dispute about the publication of footage of a young Princess Elizabeth with her uncle and mother performing a Nazi salute for the camera explains why this is such a neuralgic issue for Buckingham Palace.It exactly reflects the ambiguity at the centre of the monarchy, where the queen is both a private person and a part of the constitution.A still frame that captures the princess in a gesture that strikes us now as abhorrent still resonates, even if in 1933 it was commonplace in the often anti-Jewish upper classes to make light of Hitler's anti-Semitism. No wonder the royal archivists at Windsor guard the papers of father, uncle and grandfather with such care.
Nonetheless, it is an unacceptable anomaly that the gatekeepers of documents relating to affairs of state should apparently be mainly concerned with concealing them from the public gaze.A glance at the papers of almost any national figure in the 20th century reveals how deeply the activities of the monarchy infused public life before the Queen came to the throne in 1952. And they continue to do so, which is why the Guardian fought a 10-year legal battle for the disclosure of Prince Charles's letters to ministers.
The acknowledgments in countless histories of the 20th century betray the frustration of academics at the ruthless exploitation by royal archivists of their control over access.The ambiguity around the monarch as a private person is used either to justify banning access entirely, or as a way of legitimizing a scrutiny by the palace that more or less amounts to a right of censorship.The perception at least is that access is usually granted only to those writers who can be relied upon to pass friendly judgments.
So it is an unusually brazen fiction for the royal archives website to declare that the royal household is committed to transparency.This is an institution to which freedom of information does not apply, because the royal household was not defined as a public body in the 2000 act.Papers in the collections are not described as public records as defined in the relevant legislation.
Access is controlled by an unaccountable group whose activity, where it is visible at all, works most often to obstruct, not to facilitate.This is a deliberate and unacceptable attempt to thwart genuine academic endeavor.The royal family receives large amounts of public money, which for most people is justified by their public work.But that does not mean that their history can be sheltered from the public gaze.
Queen Victoria's journals are cited by the author to______
A
B
C
D
使用微信搜索喵呜刷题，轻松应对考试！
答案：
解析：
文中提到皇家档案属于公共产品，并且以维多利亚女王的日记为例，强调了皇家档案应该公开供公众查阅。因此，作者提到维多利亚女王的日记是为了支持皇家档案应归公众所有的观点。
创作类型：
原创
本文链接：Queen Victoria's journals are cited by the author
版权声明：本站点所有文章除特别声明外，均采用 CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 许可协议。转载请注明文章出处。让学习像火箭一样快速，微信扫码，获取考试解析、体验刷题服务，开启你的学习加速器！
分享考题 
