Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 2107:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included!
Two new commentaries on the life and work of early twentieth century short story writer Katherine Mansfield may be aimed at completely different audiences, but each uses well-known facts in new ways. The first, a popular biography by Virginia Smith, nods at Mansfield’s origins at the edge of the British empire – she was born in 1888 in Wellington, New Zealand – but is ultimately much more interested in the ways Mansfield’s simultaneously defiant and needy personality made her one of the most important, though often overlooked, groundbreakers of literary modernism.Mansfield’s relationships with fellow writers D.H. Lawrence and Virginia Woolf, as well as with her critic-husband John Middleton Murray, are examined for evidence of Mansfield’s influence on them, rather than vice versa. Ms. Smith compellingly presents Mansfield as a social chameleon skilled at imitation and adaptation; this innate flexibility, the book argues, is the very trait that made only Mansfield capable of infusing the English literary scene with the influence of Russian writer Anton Chekhov. Though in the end Ms. Smith offers few new biographical details, the truly impressive aspect of this biography is her ability to shift easily between worn fact and compelling narrative.
Whereas the few shortcomings of Ms. Smith’s book may be attributed to lack of publishing experience, a second commentary from long-time professor Jim Jeffries can make no such excuse. Mr. Jeffries’ contribution is an often tedious biographical essay that introduces a new critical edition of Mansfield’s short stories. Jeffries’ work plods point-by-point along Mansfield’s biography, attempting to attribute the inspiration for each sparkling, artfully constructed story to a traumatic event in her life. The result is not so much a portrait of Mansfield’s work as it is an ornate yet overly-simplified timeline. This offense is only compounded by Mr. Jeffries’ shallow interpretations of Mansfield’s most subtle and complex symbolism, and his continuing references to various critics and philosophers make the essay no more interesting than name-dropping at a cocktail party.
Which of the following forms the best conclusion to the second paragraph?
A. However, Mr. Jeffries does manage to say considerably more about Mansfield’s relationship with Virginia Woolf than does Ms. Smith.
B. In light of these facts, one can predict that Mr. Jeffries’ book will be far less popular than Ms. Smith’s.
C. In short, though Mr. Jeffries had at his disposal the same biographical information as Ms. Smith, he manages to do considerably worse with it.
D. Because of the many shortcomings of Mr. Jeffries’ book, it is likely that Ms. Smith will soon eclipse him as the predominant scholarly authority on Mansfield.
E. Notwithstanding these many shortcomings, Mr. Jeffries has his long-standing critical reputation to recommend him to readers.
Whereas the few shortcomings of Ms. Smith’s book may be attributed to lack of publishing experience, a second commentary from long-time professor Jim Jeffries can make no such excuse. Mr. Jeffries’ contribution is an often tedious biographical essay that introduces a new critical edition of Mansfield’s short stories. Jeffries’ work plods point-by-point along Mansfield’s biography, attempting to attribute the inspiration for each sparkling, artfully constructed story to a traumatic event in her life. The result is not so much a portrait of Mansfield’s work as it is an ornate yet overly-simplified timeline. This offense is only compounded by Mr. Jeffries’ shallow interpretations of Mansfield’s most subtle and complex symbolism, and his continuing references to various critics and philosophers make the essay no more interesting than name-dropping at a cocktail party.
Which of the following forms the best conclusion to the second paragraph?
A. However, Mr. Jeffries does manage to say considerably more about Mansfield’s relationship with Virginia Woolf than does Ms. Smith.
B. In light of these facts, one can predict that Mr. Jeffries’ book will be far less popular than Ms. Smith’s.
C. In short, though Mr. Jeffries had at his disposal the same biographical information as Ms. Smith, he manages to do considerably worse with it.
D. Because of the many shortcomings of Mr. Jeffries’ book, it is likely that Ms. Smith will soon eclipse him as the predominant scholarly authority on Mansfield.
E. Notwithstanding these many shortcomings, Mr. Jeffries has his long-standing critical reputation to recommend him to readers.
07 Aug 2026, 07:42
Kudos
Bookmarks
Explanation
Because this question does not deal directly with information from the passage, it can best by answered by making an inference. A review of the second paragraph reminds us that the author of the passage dislikes Jeffries’ work on Mansfield because it is both over-simplified and arrogant. An apt conclusion to the second paragraph will maintain the critical tone of the paragraph and summarize the author’s reasons for dislike.
A. The positive tone of this option does not fit with the critical tone of the rest of the paragraph.
B. Popularity of either book is outside the scope of both the second paragraph and the passage.
C. Correct. This option maintains the critical tone of the second paragraph, summarizes the criticism, and refers back to the first sentence of the passage, in which the thread common to both works – biographical information – was discussed.
D. The second paragraph does not speculate on the relative authority of Smith and Jeffries.
E. A compliment to Jeffries’ critical reputation does not fit with the critical tone of the second paragraph.
The correct answer is C
Because this question does not deal directly with information from the passage, it can best by answered by making an inference. A review of the second paragraph reminds us that the author of the passage dislikes Jeffries’ work on Mansfield because it is both over-simplified and arrogant. An apt conclusion to the second paragraph will maintain the critical tone of the paragraph and summarize the author’s reasons for dislike.
A. The positive tone of this option does not fit with the critical tone of the rest of the paragraph.
B. Popularity of either book is outside the scope of both the second paragraph and the passage.
C. Correct. This option maintains the critical tone of the second paragraph, summarizes the criticism, and refers back to the first sentence of the passage, in which the thread common to both works – biographical information – was discussed.
D. The second paragraph does not speculate on the relative authority of Smith and Jeffries.
E. A compliment to Jeffries’ critical reputation does not fit with the critical tone of the second paragraph.
The correct answer is C
