Sentence Correction

Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject--the advances in modern surgery, the discipline of sport, the strains of individuals in tension with society or even with themselves--was as disturbing to his own time as it is compelling for ours.
(A) was as disturbing to his own time as it is
(B) were as disturbing to his own time as they are
(C) has been as disturbing in his own time as they are
(D) had been as disturbing in his own time as it was
(E) have been as disturbing in his own time as
The present perfect tense could also be used to characterize events that took place at an unknown time in the past . so, why isnt the use of present perfect acceptable in this SC

mundasingh123 wrote:Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject--the advances in modern surgery, the discipline of sport, the strains of individuals in tension with society or even with themselves--was as disturbing to his own time as it is compelling for ours.
(A) was as disturbing to his own time as it is
(B) were as disturbing to his own time as they are
(C) has been as disturbing in his own time as they are
(D) had been as disturbing in his own time as it was
(E) have been as disturbing in his own time as
The present perfect tense could also be used to characterize events that took place at an unknown time in the past . so, why isnt the use of present perfect acceptable in this SC

In A and C, was (singular) and has (singular) do not agree with Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices (plural). Eliminate A and C.

In D, it (singular) does not agree with Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices (plural). Eliminate D.

In E, his own time implies a definite time in the past. Thus, have been (present perfect) is incorrect. The regular past tense is needed: Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices...WERE as disturbing to HIS OWN TIME. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is B.

I chose E & B but finalized E. But yes, correctly it should be B.

GMATGuruNY wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject--the advances in modern surgery, the discipline of sport, the strains of individuals in tension with society or even with themselves--was as disturbing to his own time as it is compelling for ours.
(A) was as disturbing to his own time as it is
(B) were as disturbing to his own time as they are
(C) has been as disturbing in his own time as they are
(D) had been as disturbing in his own time as it was
(E) have been as disturbing in his own time as
The present perfect tense could also be used to characterize events that took place at an unknown time in the past . so, why isnt the use of present perfect acceptable in this SC

In A and C, was (singular) and has (singular) do not agree with Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices (plural). Eliminate A and C.

In D, it (singular) does not agree with Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices (plural). Eliminate D.

In E, his own time implies a definite time in the past. Thus, have been (present perfect) is incorrect. The regular past tense is needed: Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices...WERE as disturbing to HIS OWN TIME. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is B.

Hi gmatguruny ,
isnt The phrase

disturbing to HIS OWN TIME

illogical, for how can time feel the disturbance.What i am saying is how can something disturb time .Shouldnt the correct phrase be disturbing in his own time

mundasingh123 wrote:

GMATGuruNY wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject--the advances in modern surgery, the discipline of sport, the strains of individuals in tension with society or even with themselves--was as disturbing to his own time as it is compelling for ours.
(A) was as disturbing to his own time as it is
(B) were as disturbing to his own time as they are
(C) has been as disturbing in his own time as they are
(D) had been as disturbing in his own time as it was
(E) have been as disturbing in his own time as
The present perfect tense could also be used to characterize events that took place at an unknown time in the past . so, why isnt the use of present perfect acceptable in this SC

In A and C, was (singular) and has (singular) do not agree with Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices (plural). Eliminate A and C.

In D, it (singular) does not agree with Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices (plural). Eliminate D.

In E, his own time implies a definite time in the past. Thus, have been (present perfect) is incorrect. The regular past tense is needed: Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices...WERE as disturbing to HIS OWN TIME. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is B.

Hi gmatguruny ,
isnt The phrase

disturbing to HIS OWN TIME

illogical, for how can time feel the disturbance.What i am saying is how can something disturb time .Shouldnt the correct phrase be disturbing in his own time

We need to compare APPLES to APPLES.
Since the non-underlined portion is ascribing a quality to a time (compelling FOR ours, meaning compelling for OUR TIME), the underlined portion should do the same.
Disturbing TO his own time is equivalent to compelling FOR ours.
I agree that the meaning is strange.

mundasingh123 wrote:Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject--the advances in modern surgery, the discipline of sport, the strains of individuals in tension with society or even with themselves--was as disturbing to his own time as it is compelling for ours.
(A) was as disturbing to his own time as it is
(B) were as disturbing to his own time as they are
(C) has been as disturbing in his own time as they are
(D) had been as disturbing in his own time as it was
(E) have been as disturbing in his own time as - not complete (does not fix)
The present perfect tense could also be used to characterize events that took place at an unknown time in the past . so, why isnt the use of present perfect acceptable in this SC

IMO:B

GMATGuruNY wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:

GMATGuruNY wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject--the advances in modern surgery, the discipline of sport, the strains of individuals in tension with society or even with themselves--was as disturbing to his own time as it is compelling for ours.
(A) was as disturbing to his own time as it is
(B) were as disturbing to his own time as they are
(C) has been as disturbing in his own time as they are
(D) had been as disturbing in his own time as it was
(E) have been as disturbing in his own time as
The present perfect tense could also be used to characterize events that took place at an unknown time in the past . so, why isnt the use of present perfect acceptable in this SC

In A and C, was (singular) and has (singular) do not agree with Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices (plural). Eliminate A and C.

In D, it (singular) does not agree with Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices (plural). Eliminate D.

In E, his own time implies a definite time in the past. Thus, have been (present perfect) is incorrect. The regular past tense is needed: Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices...WERE as disturbing to HIS OWN TIME. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is B.

Hi gmatguruny ,
isnt The phrase

disturbing to HIS OWN TIME

illogical, for how can time feel the disturbance.What i am saying is how can something disturb time .Shouldnt the correct phrase be disturbing in his own time

We need to compare APPLES to APPLES.
Since the non-underlined portion is ascribing a quality to a time (compelling FOR ours, meaning compelling for OUR TIME), the underlined portion should do the same.
Disturbing TO his own time is equivalent to compelling FOR ours.
I agree that the meaning is strange.

Mitch,
Sorry to open the old thread. Can you please explain how B) is parallel?

as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours

Thoughts?

@voodoo_child - Did you get any answer to your query? I have same doubt regarding this question.

How this structure in option B is parallel
as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours

ruhi.bhatia wrote:@voodoo_child - Did you get any answer to your query? I have same doubt regarding this question.

How this structure in option B is parallel
as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours

Generally, as X as Y serves to compare CLAUSES.

John's face is long.
John's face is wide.
If as X as Y serves to compare these two clauses, we get:
John's face is AS long AS it is wide.
Here, the red clause and the blue clause are parallel.

Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were disturbing to his own time.
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject are compelling for ours.
If as X as Y serves to compare these two clauses, the result is the OA:
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were AS disturbing to his own time AS they are compelling for ours.
In the OA, the red clause and the blue clause are parallel.

GMATGuruNY wrote:

ruhi.bhatia wrote:@voodoo_child - Did you get any answer to your query? I have same doubt regarding this question.

How this structure in option B is parallel
as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours

Generally, as X as Y serves to compare CLAUSES.

John's face is long.
John's face is wide.
If as X as Y serves to compare these two clauses, we get:
John's face is AS long AS it is wide.
Here, the red clause and the blue clause are parallel.

Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were disturbing to his own time.
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject are compelling to ours.
If as X as Y serves to compare these two clauses, the result is the OA:
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were AS disturbing to his own time AS they are compelling to ours.
In the OA, the red clause and the blue clause are parallel.

Hi GMATGuruNY, would you please clarify the difference between "to ours" and "for ours"?
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were disturbing to his own time.
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject are compelling to ours.
If as X as Y serves to compare these two clauses, the result is the OA:
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were AS disturbing to his own time AS they are compelling to ours.
(B)were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours.

Thanks in advance

Have a nice day
>_~

zoe wrote:Hi GMATGuruNY, would you please clarify the difference between "to ours" and "for ours"?

Generally:

to + NOUN serves to convey DIRECTION.
The ball was thrown TO MARY.
Conveyed meaning:
The ball was thrown in Mary's direction.

for + NOUN serves to convey BENEFIT.
Vegetables are good FOR CHILDREN.
Conveyed meaning:
Children derive BENEFIT from the consumption of vegetables.

OA: Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject are compelling for our time.
Here, our time = all people alive today.
Conveyed meaning:
All people alive today derive benefit from the compelling nature of Thomas Eakins' powerful style and choices of subject.

GMATGuruNY wrote: In E, his own time implies a definite time in the past. Thus, have been (present perfect) is incorrect. The regular past tense is needed: Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices...WERE as disturbing to HIS OWN TIME. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is B.

Dear GMATGuru

Choice (E): have been as disturbing in his own time as

If the choice change to be: were as disturbing in his own time as , could be correct in this case? My reasoning as follows:

Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were AS disturbing to his own time AS [Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject are] compelling for ours.
The part is red is viable ellipses and could be omitted and its presence is understood as above. This also meets about ellipses that you mention earlier if the second is verb 'to be'., even they are in different tense
Do I miss anything here? or applied your previous reasoning in wrong way?

thanks

Mo2men wrote:Dear GMATGuru

Choice (E): have been as disturbing in his own time as

If the choice change to be: were as disturbing in his own time as , could be correct in this case? My reasoning as follows:

Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were AS disturbing to his own time AS [Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject are] compelling for ours.
The part is red is viable ellipses and could be omitted and its presence is understood as above. This also meets about ellipses that you mention earlier if the second is verb 'to be'., even they are in different tense
Do I miss anything here? or applied your previous reasoning in wrong way?

thanks

The rule to which you are referring is discussed at length in my posts here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/comparison-t289039-15.html
This rule is applicable only when the adjective in each clause is THE SAME:
Its numbers are now five times greater than [its numbers were great] when the use of DDT was sharply restricted.
Here, each clause refers to the adjective in blue.
Heating-oil prices are expected to be higher this year than [heating-oil prices were high] last [year].
Here, each clause refers to the adjective in blue.

Incorrect:
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as compelling for ours.
Here, the red adjective in the second clause is different from the blue adjective in the first clause.
For this reason, the second clause requires its own subject and verb, as in the OA:
Thomas Eakins' powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as THEY ARE compelling for ours.