Reading Comprehension

GMATMadeEasy wrote:Historians sometimes forget that history is continually being made and experienced before it is studied, interpreted, and read. These latter activities have their own history, of course, which may impinge in unexpected ways on public events. It is difficult to predict when "new pasts" will overturn established historical interpretations and change the course of history.

In the fall of 1954, for example, C. Vann Woodward delivered a lecture series at the University of Virginia which challenged the prevailing dogma concerning the history, continuity, and uniformity of racial segregation in the South. He argued that the Jim Crow laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries not only codified traditional practice but also were a determined effort to erase the considerable progress made by Black people during and after Reconstruction in the 1870's. This revisionist view of Jim Crow legislation grew in part from the research that Woodward had done for the NAACP legal campaign during its preparation for Brown v. Board of Education. The Supreme Court had issued its ruling in this epochal desegregation case a few months before Woodward's lectures.

The lectures were soon published as a book, The Strange Career of Jim Crow. Ten years later, in a preface to the second revised edition, Woodward confessed with ironic modesty that the first edition "had begun to suffer under some of the handicaps that might be expected in a history of the American Revolution published in 1776." That was a bit like hearing Thomas Paine apologize for the timing of his pamphlet Common Sense, which had a comparable impact. Although Common Sense also had a mass readership, Paine had intended to reach and inspire: he was not a historian, and thus not concerned with accuracy or the dangers of historical anachronism. Yet, like Paine, Woodward had an unerring sense of the revolutionary moment, and of how historical evidence could undermine the mythological tradition that was crushing the dreams of new social possibilities. Martin Luther King, Jr., testified to the profound effect of The Strange Career of Jim Crow on the civil rights movement by praising the book and quoting it frequently.

Q1: It can be inferred from the passage that the "prevailing dogma" (line 10) held that
(A) Jim Crow laws were passed to give legal status to well-established discriminatory practices in the South
(B) Jim Crow laws were passed to establish order and uniformity in the discriminatory practices of different southern states
(C) Jim Crow laws were passed to erase the social gains that Black people had achieved since Reconstruction
(D) the continuity of racial segregation in the South was disrupted by passage of Jim Crow laws
(E) the Jim Crow laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were passed to reverse the effect of earlier Jim Crow laws

Q2 Which of the following is the best example of writing that is likely to be subject to the kinds of "handicaps" referred to in line 27?

(A) A history of an auto manufacturing plant written by an employee during an auto-buying boom
(B) A critique of a statewide school-desegregation plan written by an elementary school teacher in that state
(C) A newspaper article assessing the historical importance of a United States President written shortly after the President has taken office
(D) A scientific paper describing the benefits of a certain surgical technique written by the surgeon who developed the technique
(E) Diary entries narrating the events of a battle written by a soldier who participated in the battle

Question: Don't these questions use outside knowledge to answer the questions ? How ?
In Q1 , where in passage we find 100 percent support of giving legal status to well-established discrimintory practices in south ?
In Q2, answer choice A, how do we infer that works published happened during important historical events?

Ilana@MasterGMAT wrote:No outside knowledge is needed:

Therefore the idea that Jim Crow laws "codified traditional practice" is the prevailing dogma.

These three words "codified traditional practice" are paraphrased in the answer choice as "giving legal status to well-established discriminatory practices in the south". The idea of "codification" is paraphrased as "giving legal status" and "traditional practice" is paraphrased as "well-established discriminatory practices in the south"

Q2 Which of the following is the best example of writing that is likely to be subject to the kinds of "handicaps" referred to in line 27?

(A) A history of an auto manufacturing plant written by an employee during an auto-buying boom
(B) A critique of a statewide school-desegregation plan written by an elementary school teacher in that state
(C) A newspaper article assessing the historical importance of a United States President written shortly after the President has taken office
(D) A scientific paper describing the benefits of a certain surgical technique written by the surgeon who developed the technique
(E) Diary entries narrating the events of a battle written by a soldier who participated in the battle

"handicaps that might be expected in a history of the American Revolution published in 1776".

In this case, some outside knowledge is needed to know that the American revolution took place in 1776. The analogy is with a hypothetical historical work published in the midst of the events.

Ashley@VeritasPrep wrote: Here's my take: We get that Woodward "challenged the prevailing dogma [by arguing] that the Jim Crow laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries not only codified traditional practice but also were a determined effort to erase the considerable progress made by Black people during and after Reconstruction in the 1870's." I take *both* parts of his argument to be challenges to the prevailing dogma, so the negations of both parts should form elements of the prevailing dogma. So the prevailing dogma must essentially have denied that Jim Crow laws codified traditional practice and similarly have denied that the laws were efforts to erase the progress made by Black people. I think I'd rule OUT answer choice A, because if (A) were the prevailing dogma, the first part of Woodward's argument would actually be concordant with the prevailing dogma. In order for Woodward's argument to be opposed to the prevailing dogma, I need the prevailing dogma to say Jim Crow laws *broke with* traditional practice -- so that the anti-prevailing-dogma-Woodward can then say "No they didn't, they gave formal legal status to these practices." So I'd come to [spoiler](D)[/spoiler] here for that reason.

I think the key to this question (which I hope I've answered correctly!) is determining that even the part of Woodward's argument immediately following the "not only" is challenging the prevailing dogma -- but do correct me if this isn't right!

saxenashobhit wrote:For same passage I have doubt on another question

5. The attitude of the author of the passage toward the work of C. Vann Woodward is best described as one of

(A) respectful regard
(B) qualified approbation
(C) implied skepticism
(D) pointed criticism
(E) fervent advocacy

OA - A

My question - While reading passage I felt Woodward knowingly manipulated history which benefited existing politics.

Author makes following comments "Woodward confessed with ironic modesty that " and "Woodward had an unerring sense of the revolutionary moment, and of how historical evidence could undermine the mythological tradition that was crushing the dreams of new social possibilities"

These give kind of negative connotation and so I was leaning towards negative attitudes