We are all keen on visiting historical and artistic objects wherever possible although the impact of direct viewing has been recently challenged by some people. I strongly believe that remote viewing of such valuable items merely through computers cannot be a practical proposition, and I will outline the reasons in this essay.
To begin with, computers can never replace real public museums and art galleries. No matter how real and vivid computer images are, they are only images and can never be likened to the historical objects and works of art that we see in real or even might be allowed to touch with our fingertips. The difference can be compared to seeing the picture of a mango rather than actually eating it.
Furthermore, many historical specimen and artworks have long been maintained in galleries to preserve local cultural identity and tradition which handed down between generations. With the ever-rising using of new technology and computers, many museums and galleries may have to close which is absolutely a potential menace for cultural conservation. Moreover, without the existence of historical and artistic collections, the computer-based information about them will inevitably seem no longer to be available.
Of course, some may argue that social networks and computers have provided us with a great opportunity to travel throughout history and time to visit not only local historical and artistic collections, but also we can browse for international, historical crafts and items gathered in foreign museums. However, nearly everyone who goes to see the original will already be familiar with it from reproductions, they accept that fine art is more rewardingly viewed in its original form.
In conclusion, I believe that museums and galleries are essential for each country to preserve their cultural heritage and present educational exhibitions for visitors which seems to be hardly achieved by computer-based information.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, in conclusion, of course, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 10.4138276553 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1658.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 305.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43606557377 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9833255137 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606557377049 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 531.0 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.2821060142 49.4020404114 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 150.727272727 106.682146367 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7272727273 20.7667163134 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.54545454545 7.06120827912 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.258492133133 0.244688304435 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0963023493771 0.084324248473 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0485005307459 0.0667982634062 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128715616091 0.151304729494 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0622235340633 0.056905535591 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 13.0946893788 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 50.2224549098 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.38 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 78.4519038076 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.