|
|
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.
Updated on: 03 Oct 2019, 21:53
Originally posted by anik19890 on 28 Feb 2016, 00:54.
Last edited by Sajjad1994 on 03 Oct 2019, 21:53, edited 1 time in total.
Last edited by Sajjad1994 on 03 Oct 2019, 21:53, edited 1 time in total.
Updated - Complete topic (800).
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question 1
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
85%
(hard)
Question Stats:
22% (02:12) correct
78%
(02:21) wrong
based on 642
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Was T.S. Eliot a great letter writer? Not on the evidence gathered in a recently emerged folio of letters penned during his tenure as the chief editor of?Criterion, a once popular literary publication. Although we are offered a vivid picture of the single-handed daily management of a high-minded literary magazine, few of the?Criterion?letters are riveting or revelatory, and they are couched in a scrupulously courteous register that becomes wearisome when read in quantity. But the dazzling roster of correspondents makes even the most humdrum exchanges of interest. The big names - Wyndham Lewis, Ezra Pound, Virginia Woolf and W B Yeats - are well represented, along with an illustrious cast of literary worthies from Auden (his first appearance in the letters being a courteous rejection note) to Gertrude Stein (another rejection, rather less courteous), Robert Graves (a quarrel) and Thomas McGreevy, Criterion contributor and close friend of Samuel Beckett, whose recently published letters vie with Eliot's as essential purchases for anyone with an interest in modern writing.
1. What aspect of Eliot’s letter writing does the author specifically address?
A.Their formality
B.Their multifacetedness
C. Their expansive scope
D. Their renown
E.Their superficiality
A.Their formality
B.Their multifacetedness
C. Their expansive scope
D. Their renown
E.Their superficiality
29 Feb 2016, 04:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
The big names - Wyndham Lewis, Ezra Pound, Virginia Woolf and W B Yeats - are well represented..... From this line we can eliminate options B and E.
Clearly D is out of scope.
Now between A and C.
Elliot's letter along with the published letters of others is an essential purchase for anyone having an interest in modern writing. But the question is pertained only to Elliot's letters. Well we may relate expansive scope to modern writing but the author doesn't single out Elliot's letter alone to have an expansive scope. He mentions a bunch of them as essential. We can eliminate C for this reason.
Only option A remains. The author addresses the style of writing in Elliot's letters
Answer: A.
I may not be 100% correct in my explanation, but this was my line of thinking.
Clearly D is out of scope.
Now between A and C.
Elliot's letter along with the published letters of others is an essential purchase for anyone having an interest in modern writing. But the question is pertained only to Elliot's letters. Well we may relate expansive scope to modern writing but the author doesn't single out Elliot's letter alone to have an expansive scope. He mentions a bunch of them as essential. We can eliminate C for this reason.
Only option A remains. The author addresses the style of writing in Elliot's letters
Answer: A.
I may not be 100% correct in my explanation, but this was my line of thinking.
03 Mar 2016, 19:17
Kudos
Bookmarks
"they are couched in a scrupulously courteous register that becomes wearisome when read in quantity"
That line is saying they are extremely courteous which you can take to mean formal. So A.
That line is saying they are extremely courteous which you can take to mean formal. So A.
Have never seen an RC with only a single question before, interesting.
