What is meaning of ques... i mean which ques type is this

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members
Theater Critic: The play La Finestrina, now at Central Theater, was written in Italy in the eighteenth century. The
director claims that this production is as similar to the original production as is possible in a modern theater.
Although the actor who plays Harlequin the clown gives a performance very reminiscent of the twentieth-century
American comedian Groucho Marx, Marx's comic style was very much within the comic acting tradition that had
begun in sixteenth-century Italy.
The considerations given best serve as part of an argument that
(A) modern audiences would fi nd it hard to tolerate certain characteristics of a historically accurate
performance of an eighteenth-century play
(B) Groucho Marx once performed the part of the character Harlequin in La Finestrina
(C) in the United States the training of actors in the twentieth century is based on principles that do not differ
radically from those that underlay the training of actors in eighteenth-century Italy
(D) the performance of the actor who plays Harlequin in La Finestrina does not serve as evidence against the
director's claim
(E) the director of La Finestrina must have advised the actor who plays Harlequin to model his performance on
comic performances of Groucho Marx
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
Thanked: 1186 times
Followed by:512 members
GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Sun Jan 15, 2012 8:57 am
This is question 102 of the Official Guide 12th Edition. OA is D

I have copied the question at the bottom of this posting to make it easier to read. The question stem, "The considerations given best serve as part of an argument that" sets us up for an INFERENCE/ CONCLUSION question.

Here is how you can know this: If you look carefully at the stimulus you see that there is no actual conclusion. This is a very important indication that you have an inference question. After all, with no conclusion in the stimulus you cannot have a strengthen, weaken, assumption, method of reasoning. Nothing is in bold so it cannot be a bold-faced and there is no paradox. Basically the only thing it can be is an inference.

Once you know that it is an inference you can use Process Of Elimination. That is usually the best way to approach an inference question. Let's go through the choices and use elimination.

A) This one is clearly out of scope. We do not know what the audience would find it hard to tolerate. Eliminate.

B) Out of scope. We do not know that he did this performance! Eliminate

C) Out of scope again - we do not know how these people were trained. Eliminate

D) I will leave this one for the moment because it is not clearly out of scope. On the first pass through the answer choices, I only want to eliminate those choices that are clearly ready to be eliminated which means out of scope and predictions.

E) Out of scope. Nothing is said of why the actor played the role this way. Did the director tell him? Who knows. Out of scope.

So D) is the correct answer and here is why - the performance of the actor is mentioned - and we think it will be said that he is too modern because he acts like Groucho Marx, but then we are told that this is okay since Groucho was acting appropriately for the earlier time. So the director's claim of being as close to authentic as possible is NOT undermined by the performance of the actor.

An Inference questions ONLY Process of Elimination makes these questions much easier to address. It allows quick elimination of most answer choices.


102.

Theater Critic: The play La Finestrina, now at Central Theater, was written in Italy in the eighteenth century. The director claims that this production is as similar to the original production as is possible in a modern theater. Although the actor who plays Harlequin the clown gives a performance very reminiscent of the twentieth-century American comedian Groucho Marx, Marx's comic style was very much within the comic acting tradition that had begun in sixteenth-century Italy.

The considerations given best serve as part of an argument that
(A) modern audiences would find it hard to tolerate certain characteristics of a historically accurate performance of an eighteenth-century play
(B) Groucho Marx once performed the part of the character Harlequin in La Finestrina
(C) in the United States the training of actors in the twentieth century is based on principles that do not differ radically from those that underlay the training of actors in eighteenth-century Italy
(D) the performance of the actor who plays Harlequin in La Finestrina does not serve as evidence against the director's claim
(E) the director of La Finestrina must have advised the actor who plays Harlequin to model his performance on comic performances of Groucho Marx
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 626
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Ahmedabad
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:10 members

by ronnie1985 » Sun Jan 15, 2012 9:31 pm
IMO (D)
Follow your passion, Success as perceived by others shall follow you

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:08 pm

by nonameee » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:33 am
David, I've got two questions:

I narrowed it down to (B) a (D)

(B) I thought that since the stimulus says: "...the actor who plays Harlequin the clown gives a performance very reminiscent of the twentieth-century American comedian Groucho Marx..." , I inferred that GM must have played Harlequin.

(D) The stimulus says: "... The play La Finestrina, now at Central Theater, was written in Italy in the eighteenth century... " and then continious: "...Marx's comic style was very much within the comic acting tradition that had begun in sixteenth-century Italy..."

So how do we know that the tradition that had begun in the 16th century was still the same tradition in the 18th century?

On these basis I ruled out (D).

Could you please explain?

Thank you.

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
Thanked: 1186 times
Followed by:512 members
GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:01 am
(B) I thought that since the stimulus says: "...the actor who plays Harlequin the clown gives a performance very reminiscent of the twentieth-century American comedian Groucho Marx..." , I inferred that GM must have played Harlequin.
No. This does not mean that Groucho Marx played Harlequin. Just that the actor gives a performance that seems to be like that of Groucho in the movies or whatever Groucho did do. That is not to say that we know for sure that Groucho never played harlequin just that this is not implied and not necessary. So B is not something we can infer.
(D) The stimulus says: "... The play La Finestrina, now at Central Theater, was written in Italy in the eighteenth century... " and then continious: "...Marx's comic style was very much within the comic acting tradition that had begun in sixteenth-century Italy..."
So how do we know that the tradition that had begun in the 16th century was still the same tradition in the 18th century?
On these basis I ruled out (D).


D actually says "(D) the performance of the actor who plays Harlequin in La Finestrina does not serve as evidence against the director's claim"

We do not have to know that the acting was necessarily in the same tradition. What the evidence is doing is helping to note that although Groucho Marx is from the 20th century his performance would not have post-dated the play. That is the real danger of giving a performance like that of Groucho, he acted two hundred years after this play so is his performance too modern? Well, no since it is part of a tradition from before the play was written.
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:08 pm

by nonameee » Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:11 am
We do not have to know that the acting was necessarily in the same tradition.
How come? The director says:
The director claims that this production is as similar to the original production as is possible in a modern theater.
And we also know that:
Marx's comic style was very much within the comic acting tradition that had begun in sixteenth-century Italy
So, how come that from these two sentences we can infer that we don't have to prove that production is similar the original production and that Marx's 16th century style satisfies this condition?

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:28 pm
David - Unfortunately i got confused after reading your reply but after reading again and again i understood it somewhat and have mentioned my reply below. Do you think i understood it or i am missing something in my strategy
nonameee - consider my answer below:

Question: We need to find out what can be inferred from given statements.

Actor gives a performance similar to GM and GM's style was similar to 16th century tradition. So actor gives a performance similar to 16th century tradition.

Director says production is similar to original production but actor's performance is similar to 16th century.

Though there may be further questions that whether 16th century and 18th century were similar or not BUT we NEED NOT got into that as underlined sentence qualifies D which is the performance of the actor who plays Harlequin in La Finestrina does not serve as evidence against the director's claim
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
Thanked: 1186 times
Followed by:512 members
GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:38 pm
Yes! That sounds good just as you have said it...
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:19 pm
Thanks David for confirmation.
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:08 pm

by nonameee » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:47 pm
BUT we NEED NOT got into that as underlined sentence qualifies D which is the performance of the actor who plays Harlequin in La Finestrina does not serve as evidence against the director's claim
vikram4689, the director bases his proclamation that the actor who plays Harlequin doesn't serve against the director's claim (i.e., the production is as close to the original as possible) on the fact that the actor's style is similar to Marx. However, Marx's style is that of 16th century, not 18th century!

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:08 pm

by nonameee » Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:49 pm
To add to my previous post:

What if Marx style was that of 10th century? Would that make a difference?

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
Thanked: 1186 times
Followed by:512 members
GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:11 am
Nonamee -

The way that the evidence is used is this, Let me use an anology:

Let's say that we have a movie and the actor is wearing glasses. But the movie is from the 18th century and you say "wait a minute those glasses are proof that this movie is not based on historical fact." Then you learn that the style of glasses was available beginning in the 16th century. Now even if those glasses were not fashionable in the 18th Century. Even if very few people wore them, the glasses are no longer proof that the movie is historical wrong b/c the glasses were available.

I am not sure that the 10th century would even matter, although the 10th century in Europe not much was happening! Better to have been in the Middle East or Asia or a Native American or African in the 10th Century...
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:08 pm

by nonameee » Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:33 am
Let's say that we have a movie and the actor is wearing glasses. But the movie is from the 18th century and you say "wait a minute those glasses are proof that this movie is not based on historical fact." Then you learn that the style of glasses was available beginning in the 16th century. Now even if those glasses were not fashionable in the 18th Century. Even if very few people wore them, the glasses are no longer proof that the movie is historical wrong b/c the glasses were available.
David,

a) How do you know that 16th century comic style was still available in the 18 century? For all we know, it could have been quite the opposite. Who knows?

b) Assuming that the 16th century comic style was available in the 18th century, how can we extrapolate from it to claim that this was an accurate characteristic of the comic style that was actually used in the 18th century?

IMO, for (D) to be a logical answer (i.e., answer that would flow from the stimulus), I would have to know that the 16th century style was not only available in the 18th century, but actually practiced. Otherwise, if that style was available but absolutely not used, how can we claim that the production was close to the original? If it were close to the original, it would use the comic style that had been actually used in the 18th century.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:32 am
Hi nonamee,

I did not get the sentence. If you can present a detailed analysis of problem(just as i did to confirm my ans from David) then i will be able to help.
nonameee wrote: vikram4689, the director bases his proclamation that the actor who plays Harlequin doesn't serve against the director's claim (i.e., the production is as close to the original as possible) on the fact that the actor's style is similar to Marx. However, Marx's style is that of 16th century, not 18th century!
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:08 pm

by nonameee » Mon Jan 30, 2012 4:09 am
vikram4689:

The director claims that:
- the production is close to the original one (18th century)

The stimulus says that:
- the actor who plays Harlequin has a similar style to Marx

BUT the stimulus says that:
- Marx's style had begun in sixteenth-century Italy

a) How do you know that 16th century comic style was still available in the 18 century? For all we know, it could have been quite the opposite. Who knows?

b) Assuming that the 16th century comic style was available in the 18th century, how can we extrapolate from it to claim that this was an accurate characteristic of the comic style that was actually used in the 18th century?

IMO, for (D) to be a logical answer (i.e., answer that would flow from the stimulus), I would have to know that the 16th century style was not only available in the 18th century, but actually practiced. Otherwise, if that style was available but absolutely not used, how can we claim that the production was close to the original? If it were close to the original, it would use the comic style that had been actually used in the 18th century.