Many stage actors follow a form of method-acting in which the emphasis

Question

Many stage actors follow a form of method-acting in which the emphasis is on understanding the psychology of the characters being played and keeping in mind how the characters would have reacted in various situations being enacted. In their pre-rehearsal stage, they go to extremes such as living in situations similar to their hypothetical characters’. Therefore, it is highly likely that such actors are very consistent in their initial performance in rehearsals and their final on-stage performance.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above argument?

A. For an actor, the repetition of a performance in rehearsals adds little to the understanding of the character being played

B. There are some props that are available to actors only on the final day of the show

C. Many famous and highly paid actors are from acting schools that specialize in teaching method-acting.

D. It is very likely for a method-actor playing the role of a beggar to actually dress up and wear torn and soiled clothes throughout the preparation stage to understand the psychology of the character.

E. These days many film actors prefer to do multiple rehearsals with their co-actors to fully understand the character they are portraying.

adeep93 · Answer

I think E is the answer. Can anyone explain the reasoning behind A?

vector01 · Answer

My guess is that the answer is A.

The argument is that because method actors have already understood a large part of their characters' psychology prior to even before the rehearsal starts, they are hence very consistent in their performance from the start (rehearsals) to the end (on-stage performance). Option A supports this as it states that the rehearsals add little to the understanding of the character being played, which supports the fact that the method actors probably already knew the character well before the rehearsals.

Many stage actors follow a form of method-acting in which the emphasis is on understanding the psychology of the characters being played and keeping in mind how the characters would have reacted in various situations being enacted. In their pre-rehearsal stage, they go to extremes such as living in situations similar to their hypothetical characters’. Therefore, it is highly likely that such actors are very consistent in their initial performance in rehearsals and their final on-stage performance.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above argument?

A)For an actor, the repetition of a performance in rehearsals adds little to the understanding of the character being played
B)There are some props that are available to actors only on the final day of the show
C)Many famous and highly paid actors are from acting schools that specialize in teaching method-acting.
D)It is very likely for a method-actor playing the role of a beggar to actually dress up and wear torn and soiled clothes throughout the preparation stage to understand the psychology of the character.
E)These days many film actors prefer to do multiple rehearsals with their co-actors to fully understand the character they are portraying.

gmatsarab · Answer

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above argument?

A)For an actor, the repetition of a performance in rehearsals adds little to the understanding of the character being played - If there is not much added to understanding of character by repetition, in that case the very first rehearsal performance will be similar to that on the last day, i.e., consistent
B)There are some props that are available to actors only on the final day of the show - No information which provides detail on consistency
C)Many famous and highly paid actors are from acting schools that specialize in teaching method-acting. - No information which provides detail on consistency 
D)It is very likely for a method-actor playing the role of a beggar to actually dress up and wear torn and soiled clothes throughout the preparation stage to understand the psychology of the character. - Again, No information which provides detail on consistency between first and final day
E)These days many film actors prefer to do multiple rehearsals with their co-actors to fully understand the character they are portraying. - No information which provides detail on consistency

sharmashagun770 · Answer

Can someone from e-gmat team provide a detailed solution to this question?

Posted from my mobile device

BlueCrab · Answer

IMO A. Didn't read the rest.
The argument gives a bunch of reasons why the performance is consistent on the first and final day such as living in similar conditions and understanding the psychology etc.. We need to strengthen this. A says that rehearsals have negligible effect which indirectly means that the real reason for their consistency is not repetition/rehearsals but the bunch of reasons that the argument gives.

Hope it helps

tanishqgirotra · Answer

i understand that A strengthens the argument, but I don't think more than D

Aryan19852 · Answer

D doesn't strengthens the conclusion that they are consistent in the initial performance even a bad actor who didn't followed method acting nor live in similar situation of character just casually coming to shoot will have to wear beggar dress in order to perform but that wouldn't tell he would do well so is A is best option

vibhorrokstar19 · Answer

Not E because the conclusion of the argument says that the actors performance is consistent throughout the Journey. Whereas E is not Helping the conclusion of the Argument. 
A because, if the actors are not going to learn something new about the character then he will have consistent performance throughout.

AnkitNandwani1 · Answer

To determine which option most strengthens the argument that method actors are likely to be consistent in their initial rehearsal performances and their final on-stage performances, we need to find a statement that supports the connection between method-acting preparation and consistent performance.

The argument hinges on the idea that method actors, through their deep understanding and immersive experiences of their characters, are more consistent in their performances.

Let's evaluate the options:

This option suggests that the understanding gained through method acting (prior to rehearsals) is crucial, and that rehearsals do not significantly enhance character understanding, thus supporting the idea that initial character understanding leads to consistent performance.

This does not directly relate to the actor's consistency in understanding and portraying the character, as it is more about logistical aspects of the performance.

While this supports the credibility of method-acting, it does not directly address the consistency of performance between rehearsals and the final show.

This option illustrates the extent of method actors' preparation, reinforcing the argument that such deep immersion leads to consistency in performances. However, it is more of an example of method-acting practice rather than directly strengthening the argument about consistency.

This suggests that rehearsals contribute to understanding characters, which might actually weaken the argument that initial preparation alone leads to consistent performance.

The option that most directly strengthens the argument is A, as it supports the idea that the method actors' initial understanding of their characters is the key factor in their consistent performances, rather than the rehearsals themselves.

karrrtt · Answer

Many stage actors follow a form of method-acting in which the emphasis is on understanding the psychology of the characters being played and keeping in mind how the characters would have reacted in various situations being enacted. In their pre-rehearsal stage, they go to extremes such as living in situations similar to their hypothetical characters’. Therefore, it is highly likely that such actors are very consistent in their initial performance in rehearsals and their final on-stage performance.

I will try to give my explanation for this one.

On reading the passage it is very clear that:-
Conclusion-
 Therefore, it is highly likely that such actors are very consistent in their initial performance in rehearsals and their final on-stage performance. 
In simple terms it means that the actors will be very consistent with their performance on D Day.

Premises(In simple terms)-
1-Actors follow one form of method acting
2-In pre rehearsal they to extent of mimicking their hypothetical characters.

Question  -Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above argument?

A. For an actor, the repetition of a performance in rehearsals adds little to the understanding of the character being played 
This option rightly captures the gap that REHERSALS and FINAL performances will be similar by stressing on the point that the actors  will not learn  more in their rehearsals which will affect their performance in the FINALS So making us believe more in the Author's conclusion that their performances in REHERSALS and FINALS be similar

glagad · Answer

"are very consistent in their initial performance in rehearsals and their final on-stage performance." - Isnt this confusing language?

What I interpret, it means, from the discussion is that the performacne is almost same during initial performance and final performance.

However, what I inferred is that the performance is consistent from initial performance to final on-stage performance.

That made me choose D.

Can the experts help?

glagad · Answer

The wording of the argument seems slightly confusing thus confusing me between A vs D. Can you please help?

egmat · Answer

glagad  You're absolutely right that the wording can be confusing, and your interpretation actually shows good critical thinking.

Clarifying the Key Phrase:
 
When the argument says actors are "very consistent  in  their initial performance in rehearsals  and  their final on-stage performance," it means:
→ Initial rehearsal performance = Final on-stage performance (they're  the same )

Think of it like saying "John is consistent in his morning routine and his evening routine" - meaning both routines are similar to each other.

Why Your Confusion Led to Choosing D:
 
You interpreted it as "consistent  throughout  the process" (like being steadily good), which made you look for an answer showing dedication/commitment throughout preparation. That's why  D  seemed appealing - it shows method actors maintaining character throughout.

But here's what the argument actually needs strengthening: 
The argument claims: Deep pre-rehearsal preparation → Performance doesn't change from first rehearsal to final show

To strengthen this, we need to explain  why  early preparation would prevent changes during the rehearsal period.

Why A is Correct:
 
Choice  A  states rehearsals add little to understanding the character. This perfectly explains the consistency:

- Method actors already deeply understand their character  before  rehearsals (from living in character)
- If rehearsals don't add understanding → Performance won't evolve/change
- Therefore: Initial rehearsal = Final performance ✓

Choice  D  just gives another example of extreme preparation but doesn't explain why this leads to performance consistency.

I hope this clears up your confusion? Let me know if you have any follow-up questions!

adi007 · Answer

The question wants us to prove there is an consistency in actor performance in initial and final performance. Simply think how is this possible - one way is he is practicing so much but then the arguments says he understands the role and his character so well may be the reaction could come out naturally. 
and what should not be true - practice makes the man perfect 😂. But yeah, thats what is required in strengthening this. The understanding of the role that makes his performance consistent. 
This is exactly what A option says and so its the ans. 
 This is not strengthening the point directly but you are eliminating the point which can weaken the conclusion

adi007 · Answer

There are 3 ways to approach Strengthen questions:

1st preference – Provide evidence/fact/point that directly makes the assumption stronger.
2nd preference – State or confirm the assumption itself, if 1st option is not available.
3rd preference – If neither of the above is available, look for an option that eliminates a potential weakness or alternative explanation - but this should be the last preference.

Many stage actors follow a form of method-acting in which the emphasis

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Many stage actors follow a form of method-acting in which the emphasis

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards