#11 - Global Reference, Must Be True, Subject Perspective

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[mokkyukkyu]

Is A wrong because of the part "the most talented"?
I was not sure about C because I was confused with the last paragraph...what does it talk about?

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hi mokkyukkyu,

Thanks for your question!

To help you figure out where you went wrong here, please provide a detailed breakdown of how you understood the question you’re asking about. Since you’re asking about a Reading Comprehension question, we expect to see evidence that you were able to do the following:

• Correctly identify the type of question in the stem.
• If the stem refers to a specific concept in the passage, identify where in the passage this concept was discussed.
• If the stem allows for a paraphrasable answer, tell us what it was. (Don't be afraid if your prephrase was off).
• Assuming this is a Must Be True question, as most RC questions are, tell us what textual evidence you have supporting your choice of (incorrect) answer.
• Explain why you believe the correct answer choice is not supported by the passage.

The more you tell us about your method of approach, the better we can help you figure it out.

Thanks!

[mpoulson]

Hello,

I was able to identify the justification for C. Specifically, I recognize in paragraph 4 that "a great deal of art went against the grain of elite values..since the art endured critics must engage in an freudian analysis and claim that hidden art embodied the ideals of the elite". Essentially, critics who believe that high art is a representation of the elites have to demonstrate how this art that seeemingly is not supportive of the elite's ideals actually are. However, lines 6-7, which are directly attributed to Taruskin's book say that high art "is produced by and for political and social elites". This seems to be strong support for D. Can you explain why D is wrong? Thank you.

-Micah

[Claire Horan]

Hi Micah,

D is wrong because the stimulus asks for what the "passage suggests" about what Taruskin's view requires. This is a different question from "What does Taruskin's view require?" The answer to what the passage suggests is not something that Taruskin has stated explicitly but rather something that the author of the passage has hinted at. The passage actually suggests something contrary to D when it describes works that were commissioned (and thus not necessarily done by artists of the elite class) but nonetheless identified with that class.

[mshaheen14]

Hi Powerscore,

I am having trouble understanding why (C) is correct over (B).

I took the line " critics like Taruskin prefer to deal with art produced the second way, because it enables them to construct a subtle analysis of the way such art embodied the ideology of the elite" in paragraph three to mean that his view of high art would favor artist embodying the ideologies of the elites that they serve.

My paraphrase matched this, assuming that the correct answer would discuss artists reflecting the ideology of the elites.

I can see from the last paragraph why (C) is correct, but was wondering what made it the better answer choice over (B) so that I can avoid mistakes like this in the future.

[Adam Tyson]

I see two problems with answer B, mshaheen14. First, it talks about "successful artists," and the passage is not about successful vs. not-successful artists, but about the relationship between the art any artist produced for some member of the elite and the views held by those elites. Second, the answer is about artists "working today," and Taruskin's position is about the "high art" of some past era rather than about any current art movement or style.

[mollylynch]

Hello,

I am trying to connect "endured, the sociohistorical critic, like Taruskin, must engage in an analogue of Freudian analysis, and claim that in hidden ways such art embodied the ideals of the elite, who were unaware that those ideals are revealed by work of which they overtly disapproved." to Answer C, but I just cannot see where the connection is.

Can someone explain?

[Jeff Wren]

Hi Molly,

Before tackling the final sentence of the passage (which is admittedly tricky), let's summarize what the passage states regarding Richard Taruskin. According to the first paragraph, Taruskin (along with most sociohistorical critics) believes that high art was created for the political/social elites and therefore reflects their values.

The author of the passage generally disagrees with this view. One of the problems with this view is that we have examples of this art that is still around (i.e. it endured) that expresses ideas critical of the values of the political/social elites. These examples seem to be strong evidence that this art didn't always reflect the values of the elites.

In the final sentence, the author is basically implying that for Taruskin to somehow try to make sense of evidence that seems to directly contradict his view, he basically needs to go through some mental gymnastics and argue that, even though the art contradicts the elite values at face value, the art somehow supports the elite values indirectly/subconsciously.

This is what Answer C is describing. The important thing to understand is that this idea, that this art both supports and attacks elite ideals, is problematic and the author doesn't agree with it or with Taruskin.

[ikim10]

For this question, I narrowed down my options to (A) and (C). Roughly, I eliminated (B), (D), and (E) for the following reasons:

(B) - The answer choice is about "the most successful artists working today." However, we don't know what Taruskin and sociohistorical critics think about artists today; it's possible in the modern age things have changed where "high art" no longer just reflects the values of the political and social elites.

(D) - "artists who are themselves members of the aristocratic or middle classes." The passage does not state or infer that artists were of a specific social class, so we cannot attribute this view to Taruskin.

(E) - This is the opposite of Taruskin's view; he and other sociohistorical critics believe that "high art" embodies the ideology of the elite.

Between (A) and (C), I chose (A) because I thought it was reinforcing the point made in paragraph 3. "subtle analyses of the way such art embodied the ideology of the elite" seemed to be good evidence for (A).

Is (A) incorrect because it states "the most talented artists?" I think I equated "well-known artist" from the passage with this phrase, but can see how those two might not be the same. I can see why (C) is the correct answer, but am looking for stronger evidence as to why (A) is incorrect.