- Posts: 47
- Joined: Jul 21, 2017
- Wed Oct 25, 2017 1:57 pm
#40909
I arrived at answer B by trying to find the answer that best talked about (1) the topic of the passage, (2) the scope of the passage, and (3) the author's viewpoint, as suggested by a Powerscore person in the general comments for this passage. I'm terrible when it comes to art passages (art bores me to death) and particularly failed with this passage initially, so this helps me to explain it and hopefully it's right and helps someone else.
A) wrong b/c the passage doesn't mention Eileen's style of work preventing her from garnering acclaim from critics of contemporary art and it doesn't mention her focus on hidden details, specifically her blending of interior and exterior.
B) the correct answer b/c it discusses all of Eileen's work, mentions lacquer as influencing all of her work, and talks about her downplaying of the differences between interior and exterior (her focus on details).
C) wrong b/c it doesn't discuss her lacquer work, a major influence in the rest of her work. It also doesn't talk about the range of work she did nor her unique attention to detail to make an art piece multifaceted in these settings. Functionability is mentioned in the passage like it is here, but the details provided here are too narrow to contain info about her other goals through her art.
D) a tough contender, for me at least. The very first part up until the comma discusses the range of her artistic works and afterwords discusses the "hidden" aspect of her work. The only thing I would say is lacking in this answer is that it doesn't explain how the "hidden" aspect of her work was influenced by her earlier lacquer work, which was emphasized strongly in the passage.
E) flat out wrong. Nowhere in the passage is it mentioned that Eileen was dissatisfied with Japanese traditional art. To the contrary, she admired it so much that she studied the Japanese tradition of lacquer in Paris and later implemented the spirit of the technique into all of her works.
Let me know what you think! Sorry if my explanation was kind of long!
A) wrong b/c the passage doesn't mention Eileen's style of work preventing her from garnering acclaim from critics of contemporary art and it doesn't mention her focus on hidden details, specifically her blending of interior and exterior.
B) the correct answer b/c it discusses all of Eileen's work, mentions lacquer as influencing all of her work, and talks about her downplaying of the differences between interior and exterior (her focus on details).
C) wrong b/c it doesn't discuss her lacquer work, a major influence in the rest of her work. It also doesn't talk about the range of work she did nor her unique attention to detail to make an art piece multifaceted in these settings. Functionability is mentioned in the passage like it is here, but the details provided here are too narrow to contain info about her other goals through her art.
D) a tough contender, for me at least. The very first part up until the comma discusses the range of her artistic works and afterwords discusses the "hidden" aspect of her work. The only thing I would say is lacking in this answer is that it doesn't explain how the "hidden" aspect of her work was influenced by her earlier lacquer work, which was emphasized strongly in the passage.
E) flat out wrong. Nowhere in the passage is it mentioned that Eileen was dissatisfied with Japanese traditional art. To the contrary, she admired it so much that she studied the Japanese tradition of lacquer in Paris and later implemented the spirit of the technique into all of her works.
Let me know what you think! Sorry if my explanation was kind of long!
