It is the mark of a superior conductor that he or she has the authority to insist, even with a top orchestra, that rehearsal work must be intensified. This authority cannot simply be claimed, the conductor must earn it by winning the orchestra's respect for the artistic interpretations he or she is currently pursuing.
In taking the position outlined, the author presupposes which one of the following?
(A) Superior conductors devise different interpretations of composition for each orchestra with which they perform it.
(B) Superior conductors are perfectionists who are never satisfied with any performance even by a top orchestra.
(C) Top orchestras are always ready to put in additional work on rehearsals if the conductor considers additional rehearsing necessary.
(D) Top orchestras can appreciate the merits of an interpretation even before they have brought it to full realization.
(E) Even top orchestras are not always led by superior conductors.
Why isn't options A and B? Any experts advice on this?
OA: D
It is the mark of a superior conductor that he or she has th
This topic has expert replies
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 426
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 8:48 pm
- Followed by:1 members
GMAT/MBA Expert
- ceilidh.erickson
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2095
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pm
- Thanked: 1443 times
- Followed by:247 members
First - please name the SOURCE of your question. It's a copyright violation to post questions without sources.
When you are asked to identify an ASSUMPTION (aka presupposition), you are looking for the unstated premise that MUST be true for the conclusion to hold.
When you're reading the argument, identify the conclusion of the argument and the premises that support it. Then think: what information is missing that would have to be true for that conclusion to follow from those premises?
Then as you're going through the answer choices, think: does this HAVE to be true? If it weren't true, would that destroy the argument?
(A) Superior conductors devise different interpretations of composition for each orchestra with which they perform it.
Does this have to be true? We're told that the conductor has to win the orchestra's respect for the artistic interpretation. But does that interpretation have to be different every time? There's no reason given to think so. If the interpretation were the same for every orchestra, he/she could still win that respect, and get the orchestra to rehearse intensively.
(B) Superior conductors are perfectionists who are never satisfied with any performance even by a top orchestra.
Does this have to be true? Could these conductors be non-perfectionists (or occasionally be satisfied) and still get their orchestras to practice intensively, based on respect for the artistic interpretation? Sure, I don't see why not. So this isn't necessary.
(C) Top orchestras are always ready to put in additional work on rehearsals if the conductor considers additional rehearsing necessary.
We're only told that a superior conductor has the authority to *insist* on intensified rehearsals. That doesn't necessarily mean that the orchestras are always ready to comply.
(D) Top orchestras can appreciate the merits of an interpretation even before they have brought it to full realization.
Does this have to be true? Well, if conductors win respect for their interpretation --> then they can insist on intensified rehearsals to achieve it, then it must be true that the orchestra can tell that this artistic vision is laudable even before they have practiced enough to make it sound perfect. If they couldn't tell the merits in advance, then the merits could not be a precondition for extra practice. Correct!
(E) Even top orchestras are not always led by superior conductors.
Irrelevant. We're talking about how to distinguish superior conductors, not superior orchestras.
The answer is D.
When you are asked to identify an ASSUMPTION (aka presupposition), you are looking for the unstated premise that MUST be true for the conclusion to hold.
When you're reading the argument, identify the conclusion of the argument and the premises that support it. Then think: what information is missing that would have to be true for that conclusion to follow from those premises?
Then as you're going through the answer choices, think: does this HAVE to be true? If it weren't true, would that destroy the argument?
(A) Superior conductors devise different interpretations of composition for each orchestra with which they perform it.
Does this have to be true? We're told that the conductor has to win the orchestra's respect for the artistic interpretation. But does that interpretation have to be different every time? There's no reason given to think so. If the interpretation were the same for every orchestra, he/she could still win that respect, and get the orchestra to rehearse intensively.
(B) Superior conductors are perfectionists who are never satisfied with any performance even by a top orchestra.
Does this have to be true? Could these conductors be non-perfectionists (or occasionally be satisfied) and still get their orchestras to practice intensively, based on respect for the artistic interpretation? Sure, I don't see why not. So this isn't necessary.
(C) Top orchestras are always ready to put in additional work on rehearsals if the conductor considers additional rehearsing necessary.
We're only told that a superior conductor has the authority to *insist* on intensified rehearsals. That doesn't necessarily mean that the orchestras are always ready to comply.
(D) Top orchestras can appreciate the merits of an interpretation even before they have brought it to full realization.
Does this have to be true? Well, if conductors win respect for their interpretation --> then they can insist on intensified rehearsals to achieve it, then it must be true that the orchestra can tell that this artistic vision is laudable even before they have practiced enough to make it sound perfect. If they couldn't tell the merits in advance, then the merits could not be a precondition for extra practice. Correct!
(E) Even top orchestras are not always led by superior conductors.
Irrelevant. We're talking about how to distinguish superior conductors, not superior orchestras.
The answer is D.
Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
GMAT/MBA Expert
- ceilidh.erickson
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2095
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pm
- Thanked: 1443 times
- Followed by:247 members
For more on using this NEGATION TEST to determine if the answer choice is NECESSARY to the argument, see:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/a-newly-disc ... tml#776775
https://www.beatthegmat.com/gmat-questio ... tml#792923
https://www.beatthegmat.com/wine-sulfite ... tml#797106
https://www.beatthegmat.com/qs-pack-two- ... tml#792438
https://www.beatthegmat.com/a-proposed-c ... tml#782633
https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-cr-birds- ... tml#782145
https://www.beatthegmat.com/the-use-of-n ... tml#560777
https://www.beatthegmat.com/a-newly-disc ... tml#776775
https://www.beatthegmat.com/gmat-questio ... tml#792923
https://www.beatthegmat.com/wine-sulfite ... tml#797106
https://www.beatthegmat.com/qs-pack-two- ... tml#792438
https://www.beatthegmat.com/a-proposed-c ... tml#782633
https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-cr-birds- ... tml#782145
https://www.beatthegmat.com/the-use-of-n ... tml#560777
Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education