#12 - Global Reference, Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[Chandler H]

Hi, this question was particularly challenging for me because all of them mention "admiration" in some way, and it was difficult for me to parse out the nuances between the answer choices. Could you tell me if I am eliminating the answer choices correctly?

B) There is no evidence that she was "positioned on the periphery of the art world"
C) There is no evidence that she "remained faithful to Japanese architectural traditions
D) The author never mentions a "rapid" development in her work, nor an appreciation towards it
E) There is no evidence that she "revolutionized the field of structural design"

In addition I had trouble choosing A because I could not identify where in the passage the author mentions her being different from her contemporaries. Is it in the first paragraph where it states that Gray "eschewed the... lines of the Art Nouveau movement that had flourished in Paris"?

Hi PowerScore,

I followed the same approach as described above, except I eliminated A because of "...sets her work apart from that of many of her contemporaries."

After reading that is the correct answer, I guess it's the less of the 5 evils, but where is the indication of "many others"? If anything it says that the craft was little known in Europe which implies that she may have been one of the first or few artists doing it. I get the implication that she was different than others, I just don't get that she was different from "many others". What am I missing?

Do you have any tips or recommendations for how to tackle this type of question better?

Thanks!

Hi Ana,

All good questions! In terms of textual evidence for the "many of her contemporaries" line, I would point to the "eschewing Art Nouveau" line (15), but also to the more subtle hints throughout the passage that Gray's work was unprecedented. We learn that lacquer was "little known in Europe" (11), and that Gray "did not believe that one should divorce the structural design of the exterior from the interior" (42-43), both of which imply that these were novel ideas at the time Gray worked. As for the "others/many others" distinction, "many" is a tricky word—it could mean most, or it could just mean some. It's best to not get hung up on that word specifically when choosing an answer choice.

Additionally, answer choice (A) merely asserts that her aesthetic philosophy/material set Gray's work apart from many of her contemporaries. Considering that the author has written a whole passage about how unusual and remarkable Gray's stylistic tendencies were, we can safely assume that her work is, in fact, "set apart."

Overall, this kind of question is a test not just of your ability to refer back to line numbers, but to draw a sense of the author's motivations in writing the passage more generally.

Does this make sense?

[AnaSol]

Hi, this question was particularly challenging for me because all of them mention "admiration" in some way, and it was difficult for me to parse out the nuances between the answer choices. Could you tell me if I am eliminating the answer choices correctly?

B) There is no evidence that she was "positioned on the periphery of the art world"
C) There is no evidence that she "remained faithful to Japanese architectural traditions
D) The author never mentions a "rapid" development in her work, nor an appreciation towards it
E) There is no evidence that she "revolutionized the field of structural design"

In addition I had trouble choosing A because I could not identify where in the passage the author mentions her being different from her contemporaries. Is it in the first paragraph where it states that Gray "eschewed the... lines of the Art Nouveau movement that had flourished in Paris"?

Hi PowerScore,

I followed the same approach as described above, except I eliminated A because of "...sets her work apart from that of many of her contemporaries."

After reading that is the correct answer, I guess it's the less of the 5 evils, but where is the indication of "many others"? If anything it says that the craft was little known in Europe which implies that she may have been one of the first or few artists doing it. I get the implication that she was different than others, I just don't get that she was different from "many others". What am I missing?

Do you have any tips or recommendations for how to tackle this type of question better?

Thanks!

Hi Ana,

All good questions! In terms of textual evidence for the "many of her contemporaries" line, I would point to the "eschewing Art Nouveau" line (15), but also to the more subtle hints throughout the passage that Gray's work was unprecedented. We learn that lacquer was "little known in Europe" (11), and that Gray "did not believe that one should divorce the structural design of the exterior from the interior" (42-43), both of which imply that these were novel ideas at the time Gray worked. As for the "others/many others" distinction, "many" is a tricky word—it could mean most, or it could just mean some. It's best to not get hung up on that word specifically when choosing an answer choice.

Additionally, answer choice (A) merely asserts that her aesthetic philosophy/material set Gray's work apart from many of her contemporaries. Considering that the author has written a whole passage about how unusual and remarkable Gray's stylistic tendencies were, we can safely assume that her work is, in fact, "set apart."

Overall, this kind of question is a test not just of your ability to refer back to line numbers, but to draw a sense of the author's motivations in writing the passage more generally.

Does this make sense?

Thank you, this was very helpful!