Hello,
imSKR. My in-line responses are below.
imSKR
Quote:
4. The author most probably mentions the reactions of northern White writers to non-Europeanized “sorrow songs” in order to
Meaning clarification w.r.t. 4th questionQuote:
1. It might be pointed out that even the spirituals or “sorrow songs” of the slaves—as distinct from their secular songs and stories—had been Europeanized to make them acceptable within these African American traditions after the Civil War.
Sorrow songs HAD BEEN Europeanized ,
Yes, the author is positing that even songs that had sprung from slave spirituals had been Europeanized
after the Civil War. For reference, the American Civil War ended in 1865.
imSKR
Quote:
In 1862 northern White writers had commented favorably on the unique and provocative melodies of these “sorrow songs” when they first heard them sung by slaves in the Carolina sea islands.
Question1: northern White writers HAD COMMENTED. These white writers commented original songs or Europeanized song?
If the songs were sung by slaves in front of whites, then they should have used Europeanized songs, is n’t it?
In 1862, the Civil War was still in full swing. Based on the earlier line above, we cannot comment on whether or to what extent "sorrow songs" may have been Europeanized at that time. The passage seems to suggest that these earlier songs were truer representations of the form, given the contrast that is set up with
but by 1916... every spiritual [had been] arranged so that a concert singer could sing it "in the manner of an art song." But again, we have no textual evidence to indicate whether the 1862 songs were unadulterated.
imSKR
Quote:
(B) contrast White writers earlier appreciation of these songs with the growing tendency after the Civil War to regard Europeanized versions of the songs as more acceptable
(C) show that the requirement that such songs be Europeanized was internal to the African American tradition and was unrelated to the literary standards or attitudes of White writers
Question2:
What is wrong in C: because of first part? : Requirements was not internal to tradition but was imposed ?
2nd part : was unrelated to the literary standards or attitudes of White writers should be ok, right?
These requirements were related to African American art but not as such as white writers
please confirm
AndrewN GMATNinjaWhat I have written above maps well onto (B). With (C), we encounter quite strong language as early as the first word,
show. Does the author mention the reactions in question to show or
prove something? That seems like the wrong angle to take. The word
requirement is equally strong, but the last line of the first paragraph justifies its use:
only on the condition that fits the bill of a requirement. So far, I would not dismiss (C). But then we get to the statement,
that such songs be Europeanized was internal to the African American tradition. This is incorrect. Why would African Americans Europeanize their spirituals at all if not for outside pressure? The same line we looked at before speaks to the point:
even the spirituals or "sorrow songs" of the slaves... had been Europeanized to make them acceptable within these African American traditions after the Civil War. You have to ask yourself, acceptable to whom? Slaves were singing the songs on their own, so it seems reasonable to believe that the songs were perfectly acceptable to the singers' ears. Then, after the Civil War, former slaves altered their songs to make them more acceptable within European norms.
I hope that helps. Remember to choose the answer that is hardest to argue against. Strong language typically is more debatable than softer language, and sometimes details make answer choices easier to debate, as was the case with (C).
- Andrew