Last visit was: 23 Jul 2024, 04:25 It is currently 23 Jul 2024, 04:25
Toolkit
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 517
Own Kudos [?]: 3920 [188]
Given Kudos: 17
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28864 [100]
Given Kudos: 130
Intern
Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 41
Own Kudos [?]: 161 [39]
Given Kudos: 57
Location: United States (DE)
GMAT 1: 730 Q46 V44
GPA: 3.5
General Discussion
Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 146
Own Kudos [?]: 965 [0]
Given Kudos: 78
Schools:ABCD
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
Thank you Mike for your wonderful explanation. I have an unrelated question. The passage states that "She concludes that while women gained autonomy in some areas, especially in the private sphere, they lost it in many aspects of the economic sphere. More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men. Yet women also gained power in comparison with their previous status, owning a higher proportion of real estate, for example.

color is what Lebsock believes. Do you think that color is something the author believes or Lebsock? It gets tricky because author describes someone else's work and suddenly puts his view point. It could be tricky. Any thoughts? there is no indication about who believes in "omen also gained power in comparison with their previous status, owning a higher proportion of real estate, for example" The common sense could say that Lebsock would agree with PINK statement. But I just want to make sure that I confirm it with you. thanks in advance.

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28864 [4]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
3
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
voodoochild wrote:
color (??) is what Lebsock believes. Do you think that color is something the author believes or Lebsock? It gets tricky because author describes someone else's work and suddenly puts his view point. It could be tricky. Any thoughts? there is no indication about who believes in "omen also gained power in comparison with their previous status, owning a higher proportion of real estate, for example" The common sense could say that Lebsock would agree with PINK statement. But I just want to make sure that I confirm it with you. thanks in advance.

Voodoo:
It's very confusing when you ask a question about color and don't have all the colors clearly marked. Details, details, details. In the business world, details are money, and when you lose details in the shuffle, you lose money in the process.

Everything about the passage suggests that it is purely descriptive --- the author of the passage is describing what Lesbock thinks and then what Buel and Buel think. We would need a major signpost to indicate a switch from an objective description of what Lesbock said to a interjection from the author about what is really true. That would have to be huge and unmistakable. This switch, simply the word "yet", is not nearly enough to mark a complete change in flow that large.

How frequently do you read the Book Review in the Sunday NYT? That's an excellent place to get a sense of authors of articles talking about authors of books, and there you frequently see an interchange between description of what the book author said vs. the article author's own commentary on the subject matter. There is no substitute for reading. There is no magical formula for GMAT RC that can take the place of a long-standing habit of reading.

Does all this make sense?

Mike
Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 146
Own Kudos [?]: 965 [1]
Given Kudos: 78
Schools:ABCD
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Mike,
I am sorry about color coding issue. Somehow it didn't work properly. Let me retype my question. I believe that {} is something Lebsock believes. However, [] is expressed by the author -- something as an review. I am not sure whether Lebsock would agree with it. Please share your thoughts.

Passage: {She concludes that while women gained autonomy in some areas, especially in the private sphere, they lost it in many aspects of the economic sphere. More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men. }
[Yet women also gained power in comparison with their previous status, owning a higher proportion of real estate, for example.]

Similar Passage: {In one of his posts, Mike corrected Voodoo Child for using the right color codes. Mike concluded that everything in the passage was purely descriptive --- the author of the passage was what Lesbock thinks and then what Buel and Buel think. Mike recommended people to read NYT.} [Many people read that post and benefited, as a result.]

Here {} is all author talks about Mike and Mike's opinions. [] is where author talks about his own opinion. Am I correct?
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28864 [2]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
2
Bookmarks
voodoochild wrote:
Mike,
I am sorry about color coding issue. Somehow it didn't work properly. Let me retype my question. I believe that {} is something Lebsock believes. However, [] is expressed by the author -- something as an review. I am not sure whether Lebsock would agree with it. Please share your thoughts.

Passage: {She concludes that while women gained autonomy in some areas, especially in the private sphere, they lost it in many aspects of the economic sphere. More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men. }
[Yet women also gained power in comparison with their previous status, owning a higher proportion of real estate, for example.]

Similar Passage: {In one of his posts, Mike corrected Voodoo Child for using the right color codes. Mike concluded that everything in the passage was purely descriptive --- the author of the passage was what Lesbock thinks and then what Buel and Buel think. Mike recommended people to read NYT.} [Many people read that post and benefited, as a result.]

Here {} is all author talks about Mike and Mike's opinions. [] is where author talks about his own opinion. Am I correct?

Voodoo

Once again, NO. The passage is entirely descriptive of what Lesbock thinks and of what Buel & Buel think. A single "change of direction word" (but, yet, nevertheless, although, however, etc. etc.) is simply not enough to indicate the gigantic shift away from the descriptive mode (author talking about these other authors) to a more direct argumentative mode (authors tells us directly what she thinks). Especially on the GMAT, we would need a much larger, more pronounced, transition to mark such a major change in mode.

Once again, read the Book Review in the Sunday NYT. Read that, and keep a log of all the examples of how those articles switch from descriptions of what the book author says to the opinions of the writer of the article. Do not ask anything else about this issue, and do not argue for or against anything concerning this issue, until you do the hard work of researching this in the field for yourself. No abstract rules can replace experiencing it for yourself.

Does that make sense?

Mike
Intern
Joined: 06 Feb 2014
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [4]
Given Kudos: 0
Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
3
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
81. The passage suggests that Buel and Buel’s biography of Mary Fish provides evidence for which of the following views of women’s history?
(A) Women have lost power in relation to men since the colonial era.
(B) Women of the colonial era were not as likely to be concerned with their status as were women in the nineteenth century.
(C) The colonial era was not as favorable for women as some historians have believed.
(D) Women had more economic autonomy in the colonial era than in the nineteenth century.
(E) Women’s occupations were generally more respected in the colonial era than in the nineteenth century.

"In contrast, Buel and Buel’s biography provides ample raw material for questioning the myth, fostered by some historians, of a colonial golden age in the
eighteenth century but does not give the reader much guidance in analyzing the controversy over women’s status."

First, I don't understand what is "the myth" for Buel to question.
Second, "the myth" is modified by "fostered by some historian" means that some historian support "the myth"
Third," of a colonial golden age", at my first glance, I think it is to modify historians, but later I may wonder whether it is to modify "the myth"
Lastly, come to the choice (C), I think as I don't understand what is "the myth", then I don't know what the "some historian" believe, as a result, I don't know whether the colonial era was favorable for women or not

Greatly appreciate you can help to explain.­
­
Intern
Joined: 06 Feb 2014
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [4]
Given Kudos: 0
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
3
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
VREN wrote:
Question 77 .

Why answer is not B ? is it because of the phrase " Exercise Power " ??? can anyone please explain ?

Hi, I can give you some explanation for this question from my own understanding, not in that professional way

please look at the whole sentence

"More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men."

jobs like delivering babies, supervising schools were mainly positions for women, but now were taken over by men (most of doctors who help deliver babies are men now, supervising schools aslo). Thus, it is said that women lost power in relation to men. Answer choice B says women are free to exercise power, obviously wrong

The right answer is E, because the portion in pink color is to explain the statement in front "the debate itself depends on frame of reference", depending on frame of reference is equivalently saying the debate replies on certain context.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28864 [15]
Given Kudos: 130
Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
13
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
bluebell2014 wrote:
81. The passage suggests that Buel and Buel’s biography of Mary Fish provides evidence for which of the following views of women’s history?
(A) Women have lost power in relation to men since the colonial era.
(B) Women of the colonial era were not as likely to be concerned with their status as were women in the nineteenth century.
(C) The colonial era was not as favorable for women as some historians have believed.
(D) Women had more economic autonomy in the colonial era than in the nineteenth century.
(E) Women’s occupations were generally more respected in the colonial era than in the nineteenth century.

"In contrast, Buel and Buel’s biography provides ample raw material for questioning the myth, fostered by some historians, of a colonial golden age in the
eighteenth century but does not give the reader much guidance in analyzing the controversy over women’s status."

First, I don't understand what is "the myth" for Buel to question.
Second, "the myth" is modified by "fostered by some historian" means that some historian support "the myth"
Third," of a colonial golden age", at my first glance, I think it is to modify historians, but later I may wonder whether it is to modify "the myth"
Lastly, come to the choice (C), I think as I don't understand what is "the myth", then I don't know what the "some historian" believe, as a result, I don't know whether the colonial era was favorable for women or not

Greatly appreciate you can help to explain.

Dear bluebell2014,
The phrase "fostered by some historians" is set off in commas, as a non-vital modifier. For more on vital modifiers, see:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/gmat-gram ... modifiers/
This means, we can understand the meaning of what surrounds it by eliminating it:
"...ample raw material for questioning the myth of a colonial golden age in ....
This is a hugely important tip: when every any little piece of a sentence is set off by commas, simply remove that piece to understand better the grammatical relationships of everything else.

The myth, apparently, is that there was some kind of "golden age" for women in the 18th century colonial period --- that life was particular good for women during this period. Apparently some historians fostered this myth --- perhaps, say, some 19th century historians who didn't have access to the kind of information we have now. Those historians with not enough information might have thought that the 18th century colonial period was a wonderful time for women, but Buel & Buel have show conclusively that it was not. Thus, "The colonial era was not as favorable for women as some historians have believed." Answer = (C).

Does this make sense?
Mike ­
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28864 [12]
Given Kudos: 130
Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
9
Kudos
3
Bookmarks
VREN wrote:
Question 77 .
Why answer is not B ? is it because of the phrase " Exercise Power " ??? can anyone please explain ?

Dear prasannajeet & VREN,
I'm happy to respond. It appears that bluebell2014 already gave an good answer to this, but I will say a little more.

Here's the question (which is RC #70 in the OG13)
77. The author of the passage mentions the supervision of schools primarily in order to
(A) remind readers of the role education played in the cultural changes of the nineteenth century in the United States
(B) suggest an area in which nineteenth-century American women were relatively free to exercise power
(C) provide an example of an occupation for which accurate data about women’s participation are difficult to obtain
(D) speculate about which occupations were considered suitable for United States women of the nineteenth century
(E) illustrate how the answers to questions about women’s status depend on particular contexts

First of all, let's look at the passage surrounding this ....
She [Lesbock] examines several different aspects of women’s status, helping to refine and resolve the issues. She concludes that while women gained autonomy in some areas, especially in the private sphere, they lost it in many aspects of the economic sphere. More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men.

So, first of all, tangible facts. Apparently at one time, schools were primarily the domain of women, and during the 19th century, that realm was taken over more and more by males, so women lost power in that particular arena. This is why (B) is wrong --- women did not remain powerful in schools: rather, they lost power.

Does this make sense?
Mike ­
Intern
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Posts: 15
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [1]
Given Kudos: 11
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
1
Kudos
81. The passage suggests that Buel and Buel’s biography of Mary Fish provides evidence for which of the following views of women’s history?
(A) Women have lost power in relation to men since the colonial era.
(B) Women of the colonial era were not as likely to be concerned with their status as were women in the nineteenth century.
(C) The colonial era was not as favorable for women as some historians have believed.
(D) Women had more economic autonomy in the colonial era than in the nineteenth century.
(E) Women’s occupations were generally more respected in the colonial era than in the nineteenth century.

Folks,
Need some explanation on this one. I was completely lost in this. Buel made little effort to place her story in context of recent histography. If that is the case, how can we know what evidence it provides on views of womens history.

I could not answer this question at all. Primary reason was I couldnt understand the question itself.

In all the answer choices it talked about womens status. But buel didnt mention anything about this. Now I understand that this is an inference question, but I still need some help in connecting the dots here.
Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2014
Posts: 140
Own Kudos [?]: 74 [0]
Given Kudos: 46
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
voodoochild wrote:
Mike,Can you please explain me why Answer choice e) in Question #80 (OG12) is incorrect?

Quote:
80. The passage suggests that Lebsock believes that compared to nineteenth-century American women, eighteenth-century American women were
(A) in many respects less powerful in relation to men
(B) more likely to own real estate
(C) generally more economically independent
(D) more independent in conducting their private lives
(E) less likely to work as school superintendents

This is a very tricky question, because in the passage, the comparison goes one way, but in this question, the comparison goes in the opposite direction. In the passage, we get that, compared to eighteenth-century American women, nineteenth-century American women:
* gained autonomy in some areas, especially in the private sphere, [but] they lost it in many aspects of the economic sphere.
* lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men
* gained power in comparison with their previous status, owning a higher proportion of real estate, for example.

All of those are in the form --- starting from the eighteenth-century American women, how were things different for the nineteenth-century American women?

Then, the question turns things around ---- starting from the nineteenth-century American women, how were things different for the eighteenth-century American women? Everything quoted here has to be reversed --- "more" becomes "less", "gain" becomes "loss", and vice versa. What's extremely tricky about this question is: you have to take the opposite of everything stated in black and white.

Now, with all this in mind, look at (E).
The passage tells us, nineteenth-century American women less likely to work as school superintendents than were eighteenth-century American women. This means that eighteenth-century American women were more likely to work as school superintendents than were nineteenth-century American women. (E) is incorrect.

By contrast, look at (C)
The passage tells us, nineteenth-century American women "lost [autonomy] in many aspects of the economic sphere", so the nineteenth-century American women had less autonomy, less independence, than did the eighteenth-century American women. This means, the eighteenth-century American women were "generally more economically independent" than were the nineteenth-century American women. (C) is correct.

Does all this make sense? Please let me know if anyone reading this has any further questions.

Mike

Hi Mike

Not clear on why D is not the correct option in line with your thought process. Could you please help me on that ?
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28864 [3]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
3
Kudos
himanshujovi wrote:
mikemcgarry wrote:
80. The passage suggests that Lebsock believes that compared to nineteenth-century American women, eighteenth-century American women were
(A) in many respects less powerful in relation to men
(B) more likely to own real estate
(C) generally more economically independent
(D) more independent in conducting their private lives
(E) less likely to work as school superintendents

Hi Mike

Not clear on why D is not the correct option in line with your thought process. Could you please help me on that ?

Dear himanshujovi,
I'm happy to help.

Here's what the passage says: "Lebsock, meanwhile, attempts not only to write the history of women in one southern community, but also to redirect two decades of historiographical debate as to whether women gained or lost status in the nineteenth century as compared with the eighteenth century. .... She examines several different aspects of women’s status, helping to refine and resolve the issues. She concludes that while women gained autonomy in some areas, especially in the private sphere, they lost it in many aspects of the economic sphere."
So, in going from the 18th century to the 19th century, "women gained autonomy ... in the private sphere," so 19th cent. women had more autonomy, more independence, in the private sphere than did the 18th cent. women.

Now, the tricky thing about the question is that the comparison is historically backwards --- "compared to nineteenth-century American women, eighteenth-century American women" were more what? Well, the 19th century women had more personal autonomy, so the 18th century women must have had less personal autonomy. Thus, (C) is the exact opposite of what the passage says.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28864 [3]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
3
Kudos
komalkansal wrote:
hey please some one explain ans for q77 im confused between d and e

Dear komalkansal,
I'm happy to respond.

Here's the question again (which is RC #70 in the OG13)
77. The author of the passage mentions the supervision of schools primarily in order to
(A) remind readers of the role education played in the cultural changes of the nineteenth century in the United States
(B) suggest an area in which nineteenth-century American women were relatively free to exercise power
(C) provide an example of an occupation for which accurate data about women’s participation are difficult to obtain
(D) speculate about which occupations were considered suitable for United States women of the nineteenth century
(E) illustrate how the answers to questions about women’s status depend on particular contexts

Here's the context in which that detail is mentioned ....
More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men. Yet women also gained power in comparison with their previous status, ...

Think about what is happening right there in the passage. We get the HUGE signpost "More importantly ...", which means the author is about to say something he or she considers extremely important. That should be like a giant flashing neon sign in the passage. The author of the passage says that "[Lesbock] shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference." In other words, the answer to questions such as "were women better off in the 18th century or the 19th century?" are not crystal clear because they depend on where we look: looking at different indicators of social status and power will give us different answers to such questions. The author of the passage makes this extremely important point, and then cites two examples --- the supervision of schools example, which shows women losing power in the 19th century, and then the real estate example, which shows women gaining power in the 19th century. How powerful were women in the 19th century? It depends on where we look.

That's precisely why (E) is a much much better answer. The author cited the supervision of schools example to support his or her contention, the statement in bold above, and choice (E) restates the statement in bold. It restates something we absolutely know the author of the passage considered extremely important.

The author of this passage is not at all interested in speculating about occupations of women in the 19th century. The author of this passage is concerned with comparing the relative strengths of two books by different sets of authors, and the "more importantly" statement is a HUGE statement about something that one author did very well. Choice (D) plays on the confusion some readers have been the concerns of the author of this passage vs. the concerns of the authors discussed in the passage.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
Intern
Joined: 03 May 2015
Posts: 42
Own Kudos [?]: 44 [1]
Given Kudos: 48
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Can someone explain 79? could not relate to any answer and ultimately gone wrong.
Manager
Joined: 29 Apr 2014
Posts: 108
Own Kudos [?]: 290 [12]
Given Kudos: 17
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 640 Q50 V26
GMAT 2: 660 Q51 V27
GMAT 3: 680 Q50 V31
GMAT 4: 710 Q50 V35
GMAT 5: 760 Q50 V42
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
8
Kudos
3
Bookmarks
sagarbuss wrote:
Can someone explain 79? could not relate to any answer and ultimately gone wrong.

I want to put my 2 cents on this question:

79. According to the passage, Lebsock’s work differs from Buel and Buel’s work in that Lebsock’s work
First, we need to refer back to the passage to find the clue for this question. The opening sentence says "... contrasting approaches...", so the contrast should be presented in the next sentences.

"Buel and Buel’s biography ... makes little effort to place her story in the context of recent historiography on women. Lebsock, meanwhile, ... redirect two decades of historiographical debate as to whether women gained or lost status in the nineteenth century as compared with the eighteenth century."

What we could understand from 2 above sentences is that Buel' biography did not provide much information about recent historiography. But, Lebsock's work did, specifically about 2 decades of historiographical debate. We don't need to understand what was the debate, or what the historiography was about.

(A) uses a large number of primary sources
No information comparing about the sources of 2 works.

(B) ignores issues of women’s legal status
Lebsock's work did not ignore the issues. It even help to refine and resolve the issues

(C) refuses to take a position on women’s status in the eighteenth century
This sentence refers to Buel's biography, not Lebsock's.

CORRECT! Lebsock's work did on larger historical scale.

(E) fails to provide sufficient material to support its claims
Again, no comparison about the material to support 2 works' claims.

One more thing I think about this question. If you comprehend the tone of the author well, you can know that the author favors Lebsock's work. So for this question, you could immediately cross out 3 negative choices B, C, E.
Intern
Joined: 28 Oct 2015
Posts: 40
Own Kudos [?]: 11 [0]
Given Kudos: 127
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
mikemcgarry wrote:
komalkansal wrote:
hey please some one explain ans for q77 im confused between d and e

Dear komalkansal,
I'm happy to respond.

Here's the question again (which is RC #70 in the OG13)
77. The author of the passage mentions the supervision of schools primarily in order to
(A) remind readers of the role education played in the cultural changes of the nineteenth century in the United States
(B) suggest an area in which nineteenth-century American women were relatively free to exercise power
(C) provide an example of an occupation for which accurate data about women’s participation are difficult to obtain
(D) speculate about which occupations were considered suitable for United States women of the nineteenth century
(E) illustrate how the answers to questions about women’s status depend on particular contexts

Here's the context in which that detail is mentioned ....
More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men. Yet women also gained power in comparison with their previous status, ...

Think about what is happening right there in the passage. We get the HUGE signpost "More importantly ...", which means the author is about to say something he or she considers extremely important. That should be like a giant flashing neon sign in the passage. The author of the passage says that "[Lesbock] shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference." In other words, the answer to questions such as "were women better off in the 18th century or the 19th century?" are not crystal clear because they depend on where we look: looking at different indicators of social status and power will give us different answers to such questions. The author of the passage makes this extremely important point, and then cites two examples --- the supervision of schools example, which shows women losing power in the 19th century, and then the real estate example, which shows women gaining power in the 19th century. How powerful were women in the 19th century? It depends on where we look.

That's precisely why (E) is a much much better answer. The author cited the supervision of schools example to support his or her contention, the statement in bold above, and choice (E) restates the statement in bold. It restates something we absolutely know the author of the passage considered extremely important.

The author of this passage is not at all interested in speculating about occupations of women in the 19th century. The author of this passage is concerned with comparing the relative strengths of two books by different sets of authors, and the "more importantly" statement is a HUGE statement about something that one author did very well. Choice (D) plays on the confusion some readers have been the concerns of the author of this passage vs. the concerns of the authors discussed in the passage.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Hi mikemcgarry,

Could you please tell why option B is incorrect in this question. I read through your reasoning for the correct option E but still could not reject option B. Would appreciate your help.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4490
Own Kudos [?]: 28864 [3]
Given Kudos: 130
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
1
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Hi mikemcgarry,

Could you please tell why option B is incorrect in this question. I read through your reasoning for the correct option E but still could not reject option B. Would appreciate your help.

Here's the question again (which is RC #70 in the OG13)
77. The author of the passage mentions the supervision of schools primarily in order to
(A) remind readers of the role education played in the cultural changes of the nineteenth century in the United States
(B) suggest an area in which nineteenth-century American women were relatively free to exercise power
(C) provide an example of an occupation for which accurate data about women’s participation are difficult to obtain
(D) speculate about which occupations were considered suitable for United States women of the nineteenth century
(E) illustrate how the answers to questions about women’s status depend on particular contexts

Here again is the context in which that detail is mentioned ....
{Lesbock] concludes that while women gained autonomy is some areas, especially in the private sphere, they lost it in many aspects of the economic sphere. More importantly, she shows that the debate itself depends on frame of reference: in many respects, women lost power in relation to men, for example, as certain jobs (delivering babies, supervising schools) were taken over by men. Yet women also gained power in comparison with their previous status, ...

In that passage, the author is discussing ways that women in the 19th century were losing power: women were teachers, but the roles of supervising schools was being taken over by men, so men would be bossing around all these women teachers. That is a clear example of women losing power, so it does the opposite of (B). It may be that women were "relatively free to exercise power" in the private family sphere, but "supervision of schools" is an example from the economic world-world sphere, where women were losing power.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
IIM School Moderator
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1253
Own Kudos [?]: 1265 [1]
Given Kudos: 1207
Location: India
WE:Engineering (Other)
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Hi Gmatninja, Gmatninja2.
I believe majority of passage covers Lebsock's work in detail
however I was not able to understand whether the middle portion of
passage refers to 18th or 19th century? Furthermore, how can delivering babies
be a job which can be taken up by men.
Re: Two works published in 1984 demonstrate contrasting approaches to writ [#permalink]
1   2   3
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6991 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
236 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
14064 posts