It is currently 25 Nov 2017, 03:05

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Publisher Big Books proposal to encourage new authors by

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 03 Feb 2010
Posts: 66

Kudos [?]: 73 [2], given: 4

Publisher Big Books proposal to encourage new authors by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2010, 15:37
2
KUDOS
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

67% (00:55) correct 33% (00:12) wrong based on 8 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Publisher Big Books’ proposal to encourage new authors by founding an imprint, or brand name, exclusively for first novels is doomed to artistic failure. New authors have not had the experience necessary to refine their writing styles, and a wistful desire to publish hoards of new authors will only lower quality standards and flood the market with mediocre prose.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument against the publisher’s proposed imprint?

A. Authors hoping to be published will share the cost of publication.
B. First novels will be marketed only by in-store displays, not with posters, which are more expensive.
C. All books published under the new imprint are held to rigorous, pre-determined standards of quality.
D. Many novels that are now considered classics were the first novels published by their authors.
E. Manuscripts will be solicited from authors who have already proven successful at writing short stories.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA C

Last edited by sushma0805 on 07 Apr 2010, 08:39, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 73 [2], given: 4

Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2010
Posts: 88

Kudos [?]: 67 [2], given: 17

Schools: UCLA Anderson

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2010, 17:24
2
KUDOS
It's between D and E.

The "evidence" in the question stem is the second sentence - it states that new authors lack experience. That evidence is used to support the conclusion in the third sentence.

Answer choice E directly attacks that evidence, so it undermines the conclusion. Hence E.

Answer choice D may be true, but there have also been thousands of first books by new authors that were failures, so it doesn't undermine the conclusion.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 67 [2], given: 17

Manager
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Posts: 114

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 3

Location: Mumbai

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2010, 19:32
It should be C

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 3

Intern
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 36

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 8

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: Babson (A), Smith (D)
GMAT 1: 580 Q49 V21
GMAT 2: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.85
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2010, 02:02
I think the answer is E, because the conclusion is based on the premise - authors have not had the experience necessary to refine their writing styles and option D attacks this.

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 8

Intern
Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2010, 04:38
I think the answer is C

The conclusion states that new authors will publish prose of lower quality. To attak the conclusion if there are strict control on quality check it will reduce the possibility of lower quality articles.

Its imp to attack the conclusion and not completely destroy it

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 04 Dec 2008
Posts: 104

Kudos [?]: 230 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2010, 07:42
The key here is quality. The only answer mentioned the level of quality is C.

Kudos [?]: 230 [0], given: 2

Manager
Joined: 05 Dec 2009
Posts: 126

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2010, 07:46
Ans should be C. Short Stories? We are talking abt the novels in the question....

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 196

Kudos [?]: 111 [1], given: 12

Concentration: General Management, Sustainability
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2010, 10:31
1
KUDOS
Question asks which one would most weaken the argument against the publisher’s proposed imprint:
we should weaken the argument 'New authors have not had the experience necessary to refine their writing styles, and a wistful desire to publish hoards of new authors will only lower quality standards and flood the market with mediocre prose' ==> attack the poor quality.
A. Authors hoping to be published will share the cost of publication.
>> cost is not mentioned in argument.
B. First novels will be marketed only by in-store displays, not with posters, which are more expensive.
>>Same as above.
C. All books published under the new imprint are held to rigorous, pre-determined standards of quality.
>> Yes. This will make sure there are no poor quality books.
D. Many novels that are now considered classics were the first novels published by their authors.
>> Not relatedE. Manuscripts will be solicited from authors who have already proven successful at writing short stories.
>> Not related.

C it is.
_________________

+1Kudos, if this helps

Kudos [?]: 111 [1], given: 12

Re: CR: weaken   [#permalink] 09 Apr 2010, 10:31
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Publisher Big Books proposal to encourage new authors by

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.