kntombat wrote:
IanStewart ,
AndrewN ,
GMATNinja , can anyone help us out with the question 3 and question 4 of this RC.
There seems to be a lot of confusion regarding the same.
It's funny that you'd bring this question to my attention, because part of my doctoral thesis discussed a similar issue, how certain ideas from film analysis might be applied to music. But a lot of this passage seems nonsensical to me. For example, it uses the phrase "auditory complex" (presumably to give the passage a more academic tone) to refer to part of a piece of music. The "auditory complex" is the part of the brain that interprets sounds. It is not a phrase you can use to describe a piece of music, at least not without creating a lot of confusion among an audience familiar with the phrase. Nor is it clear to me what two "distinct" facts are presented in the second paragraph. The second paragraph just says "changing some details of a work will change some global features, but not others".
I think you could rephrase the entire passage this way, without losing much or any of the meaning: "Can a piece of music produce the same experience as a painting? Elements of music might be analogous to elements of painting, but that doesn't mean they're identical. // Changing some details of a work will change some global features, but not others" (and for some reason, we should think that this last sentence expresses two distinct facts, not one).
Since the opening paragraph is interested in analogies between music and painting, but stresses that analogous things are not identical, the answer to Q1 is A.
RC questions like Q2, with very vague answer choices, I usually approach by elimination unless one answer is obviously right. There are no 'new ideas', 'contradictions', different 'opinions', or 'mutually exclusive categories' (the whole point is that our experience of art and of music might overlap), but the vague phrase 'analyzing a problem' could well apply here, as it could to very many passages. So D is the answer.
For Q3, the second paragraph discusses how the details or parts of a work (whether music/sound or painting/design) relate to the 'global characteristics' of a work, so C and E are certainly wrong. The third sentence of the paragraph says precisely the opposite of what answer D says, so D is contradicted by the passage and cannot be right. Answer A says, paraphrasing, that the same parts of a work produce different global characteristics. There's nothing in the paragraph that discusses how many different characteristics are produced by a part of a work. Only B is a good answer here; the entire discussion, in the second paragraph, about how changing details affects some global characteristics but not others is discussing precisely how the parts affect the whole. Because the question is playing a game where it switches terminology from passage to answer choice (replacing one word with a synonym, to test if the reader understands they mean the same thing), it might be useful to bear in mind how the first paragraph implicitly defined some of the terms used here. We're asked "can music sound the way a design looks?", and the first paragraph goes on to equate that experience, of how music sounds or of how a design looks, with the "broad characteristics" of a work (it says essentially that if that question has the answer 'yes', that the two things would have "the same broad characteristics"). So the "total perception of the work" in answer B should be taken to be synonymous with "global characteristics of the work" or "broad characteristics of the work".
For Q4, we'd be following on from two paragraphs that express two ideas: the first paragraph asks how similar our experience of visual art and music can be, and the second says that two facts need to be distinguished. So answer A immediately seems like a very promising answer here, since it ties together, and continues on from, both of the main ideas expressed so far. I'd be confident answer A was right even before reading any other choices. Answer B repeats the word "complexity" to test if the reader has misunderstood the meaning of "complex" in the passage (which is used to mean "configuration", and not "complicatedness"). Nothing at all in the passage discusses the "quality" of art, so C would be a non sequitur. Answer D is contradicted by the previous text, which is exploring how our experience of music and of visual art might overlap. E again to me seems to be testing if the reader has misunderstood the meaning of "complex"; the passage doesn't say music and art are too complicated to analyze. Indeed, the passage seems to be setting up further analysis, by first identifying two facts that are important to build upon.
_________________
GMAT Tutor in Montreal
Contact me for online GMAT math tutoring, or about my higher-level GMAT Quant books and problem sets, at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com
ianstewartgmat.com
04 May 2021, 20:00
close
