Q2

[griffin.811]

This was tough for me, use process of elimination:

A: thought this maybe true, lets hold it until a better answer comes up.

B:This is definitely not a counterclaim to anything. Its really just a list. We would expect a counter claim to start with "but" "however" etc... eliminate

C: For some reason I was uncomfortable eliminating this one and held it until the end. eliminated it after realizing that the items listed do not seem to "justify" anything. Their purpose is not to prove any point. If it were, we should expect something like "thus" "therefore" "so" etc... Eliminate

D: Only professional items are discussed (items pertaining to LT's theatrical and film career. Eliminate

E: I've seen this use of "typical" a lot in the past few days...and it has been the incorrect answer each time (take that for what its worth). Anyway, we have no evidence that these items are typically used for this type of work. Eliminate

A seemed to be the best fitting answer.

[noah]

Beautiful analysis.

My process was almost identical, though I didn't think about whether there were words like "but" to eliminate--I started with a general prephrasing that this was a piece of evidence useful for the biography, got down to (A) and (E), and decided (E) was too broad. The broad discussion in this passage is about using interviews.

This was tough for me, use process of elimination:

A: thought this maybe true, lets hold it until a better answer comes up.

B:This is definitely not a counterclaim to anything. Its really just a list. We would expect a counter claim to start with "but" "however" etc... eliminate

C: For some reason I was uncomfortable eliminating this one and held it until the end. eliminated it after realizing that the items listed do not seem to "justify" anything. Their purpose is not to prove any point. If it were, we should expect something like "thus" "therefore" "so" etc... Eliminate

D: Only professional items are discussed (items pertaining to LT's theatrical and film career. Eliminate

E: I've seen this use of "typical" a lot in the past few days...and it has been the incorrect answer each time (take that for what its worth). Anyway, we have no evidence that these items are typically used for this type of work. Eliminate

A seemed to be the best fitting answer.

[johnsdouglass]

I got down to A and D on this one and didn't like either.

My problem with A is that there is no indication that the author actually used the collection to gather information about T's life. I kept this as a contender because there is an indication that the memorabilia did contain information about T's times.

My problem with D is that the memorabilia doesn't really demonstrate a range or diversity. After all it is based on a specific niche of theater. It also doesn't demonstrate any of T's accomplishments. I disagree with the first poster's reason for eliminating this. There is no evidence that any of these items are from T's professional career.

So, really the answer comes down to which is less bad. Can anyone offer any insight on why A is better than D?

[FarOutsidetheBox]

Funny, I just took PT 67 and have the EXACT same question. I don't like A because I see no indication that the author actually use this information. At least with D you could make an argument that this was a hobby that was outside of (albeit related to) his professional life, the same way a professional baseball player might also be into collecting baseball cards.

So: why A?

[noah]

I got down to A and D on this one and didn't like either.

My problem with A is that there is no indication that the author actually used the collection to gather information about T's life. I kept this as a contender because there is an indication that the memorabilia did contain information about T's times.

My problem with D is that the memorabilia doesn't really demonstrate a range or diversity. After all it is based on a specific niche of theater. It also doesn't demonstrate any of T's accomplishments. I disagree with the first poster's reason for eliminating this. There is no evidence that any of these items are from T's professional career.

So, really the answer comes down to which is less bad. Can anyone offer any insight on why A is better than D?

Funny, I just took PT 67 and have the EXACT same question. I don't like A because I see no indication that the author actually use this information. At least with D you could make an argument that this was a hobby that was outside of (albeit related to) his professional life, the same way a professional baseball player might also be into collecting baseball cards.

So: why A?

Great minds think alike!

This question requires you to synthesize the passage--not just pull the meaning specifically out of those sentences. The paragraph starts and ends with a reference to limited scholarship on the issue, and, being more specific, the passage says that the memorabilia helped she some light on A.A. theater. Then, at the start of paragraph two, we see that the author gathered "background material." Finally, (A) references Tucker's "times", which is broad enough to include A.A. theater.

You buy that explanation?

[redcobra21]

Hey Noah

If you look at the first sentence of the second paragraph, it says that his sources include "microfilmed correspondence, photograms, programs, and newspapers." It goes on to say that he used "personal, in-depth interviews" in line 30 and interviews with fellow performers as well as films. It never says that he actually used the collection as a source. How are we supposed to make this inference?

Thanks!

[hychu3]

Hi,

I think Tucker's large collection of AA theater and film memorabilia does tell something about his life: that Tucker was a collector of AA and film memorabilia.

[tommywallach]

Hey Hychu,

I'm not quite sure what your point is. None of the answers mention anything about "saying something about his life." We need to use process of elimination here.

(A) CORRECT. The relevant lines here say, "...he amassed a large collection of African American theater and film memorabilia, and these artifacts...help shed new light on a part of U.S. entertainment history about which...there has been insufficient scholarship." That makes very clear that the items in question will be used as sources in the study.

(B) No comparison is made with "typical scholarly approaches to gathering historical data."

(C) The memorabilia has nothing to do with Tucker's personal memories. They are actual objects; memories are intangible.

(D) The memorabilia isn't mentioned in order to show that Tucker was into a lot of different stuff (in fact, the memorabilia is in the same field he worked in); it's mentioned because the stuff itself is directly useful in the study (see quotation).

(E) There's nothing about the memorabilia that is meant to be generalized out in order to explain what is "typically available to scholars."

Hope that helps!

-t

[hychu3]

Hi tom,

I was too brief about my post above.Sorry I am on my smart phone. We're talking about how we don't like (A) because it says "Tucker's life and times."

That "times" part is directly proven to be true by the lines you mentioned, but we didn't like that "Tucker's life" part because arguably the passage says nothing about how the contents of his collection can be a source about his life.

So I was just trying to make sense of why this answe choice is correct. Although the contents of Tucker's collection itself may not be a good source for Tucker's life, that he collected such a large collection about AA theater and film can be one source from which the author makes a claim about Tucker's life (that he collected these).

[tommywallach]

Aha! Cool. Well hope my explanation helped!

-t

[bassguitar248]

Hey everyone. Just was reading the explanations to this test and thought i'd make an account to chime in.
I originally put E and the answer, but see clearly how it is A.

It mentions "and these artifacts, along with his personal memories, help shed new light on a part of the U.S. entertainment history about which, so far, there has been insufficient scholarship"

Knowing that, in combination with the first sentence "Until my present study, African American entertainer Lorenzo Tucker had not been extensively discussed in histories of United States theater and film"

I think it clearly supports that the author used the memorabilia.

Taking the test on the 7th!

[547494985]

Hi tom,

I was too brief about my post above.Sorry I am on my smart phone. We're talking about how we don't like (A) because it says "Tucker's life and times."

That "times" part is directly proven to be true by the lines you mentioned, but we didn't like that "Tucker's life" part because arguably the passage says nothing about how the contents of his collection can be a source about his life.

So I was just trying to make sense of why this answe choice is correct. Although the contents of Tucker's collection itself may not be a good source for Tucker's life, that he collected such a large collection about AA theater and film can be one source from which the author makes a claim about Tucker's life (that he collected these).

Hey Hychu,

I'm not quite sure what your point is. None of the answers mention anything about "saying something about his life." We need to use process of elimination here.

(A) CORRECT. The relevant lines here say, "...he amassed a large collection of African American theater and film memorabilia, and these artifacts...help shed new light on a part of U.S. entertainment history about which...there has been insufficient scholarship." That makes very clear that the items in question will be used as sources in the study.

(B) No comparison is made with "typical scholarly approaches to gathering historical data."

(C) The memorabilia has nothing to do with Tucker's personal memories. They are actual objects; memories are intangible.

(D) The memorabilia isn't mentioned in order to show that Tucker was into a lot of different stuff (in fact, the memorabilia is in the same field he worked in); it's mentioned because the stuff itself is directly useful in the study (see quotation).

(E) There's nothing about the memorabilia that is meant to be generalized out in order to explain what is "typically available to scholars."

Hope that helps!

-t

hi, everyone, nice discussion! I also have a question concerning A. The passage talks about the author's study into Tucker's life, which the author make it clear in line 20 ,line 34 and line 61. So when I look at line 15-19, I thought this talks about the study of a history period in US entertainment history which has no clear bearing on the study of Tucker's life, and the whole first para seems like a background introduce Tucker's lifetime, so line 15-19 probably adds to the significance of the study by telling as Tucker is an important person. That's why i do not like A.nowhere in the passage said memorabilia is used in the study of tucker's life, although it may be used in a study in one part of US entertainment history. I know we can make a little inference and makes A right, but I think it is far from definitely prove memorabilia is used by the author in his study.

[einuoa]

Hi tom,

I was too brief about my post above.Sorry I am on my smart phone. We're talking about how we don't like (A) because it says "Tucker's life and times."

That "times" part is directly proven to be true by the lines you mentioned, but we didn't like that "Tucker's life" part because arguably the passage says nothing about how the contents of his collection can be a source about his life.

So I was just trying to make sense of why this answe choice is correct. Although the contents of Tucker's collection itself may not be a good source for Tucker's life, that he collected such a large collection about AA theater and film can be one source from which the author makes a claim about Tucker's life (that he collected these).

Hey Hychu,

I'm not quite sure what your point is. None of the answers mention anything about "saying something about his life." We need to use process of elimination here.

(A) CORRECT. The relevant lines here say, "...he amassed a large collection of African American theater and film memorabilia, and these artifacts...help shed new light on a part of U.S. entertainment history about which...there has been insufficient scholarship." That makes very clear that the items in question will be used as sources in the study.

(B) No comparison is made with "typical scholarly approaches to gathering historical data."

(C) The memorabilia has nothing to do with Tucker's personal memories. They are actual objects; memories are intangible.

(D) The memorabilia isn't mentioned in order to show that Tucker was into a lot of different stuff (in fact, the memorabilia is in the same field he worked in); it's mentioned because the stuff itself is directly useful in the study (see quotation).

(E) There's nothing about the memorabilia that is meant to be generalized out in order to explain what is "typically available to scholars."

Hope that helps!

-t

hi, everyone, nice discussion! I also have a question concerning A. The passage talks about the author's study into Tucker's life, which the author make it clear in line 20 ,line 34 and line 61. So when I look at line 15-19, I thought this talks about the study of a history period in US entertainment history which has no clear bearing on the study of Tucker's life, and the whole first para seems like a background introduce Tucker's lifetime, so line 15-19 probably adds to the significance of the study by telling as Tucker is an important person. That's why i do not like A.nowhere in the passage said memorabilia is used in the study of tucker's life, although it may be used in a study in one part of US entertainment history. I know we can make a little inference and makes A right, but I think it is far from definitely prove memorabilia is used by the author in his study.

I think the fact that this period of time is the time in which Tucker existed had a bearing on Tucker's life. I got this question wrong at first, but in thinking about it later, I think that since the collection definitely tells about Tucker's times, and since Tucker existed in those times, it probably wouldn't be too far to say that the times says something about Tucker's life as well.

[ohthatpatrick]

If you’re looking for PROOF that the author used Tucker’s memorabilia, you won’t find it.

If you’re looking for ADEQUATE SUPPORT that the author did, you will.

RC question stems that ask
“the author brought up _____ in order to”
“the author’s reference to _____ serves to”
“the author discusses _____ primarily to”
all end with an infinitive … “to do WHAT?”

Infinitives express purpose. Our job is to think not strictly about WHAT detail was said, but WHY it was said.

These local purpose questions will usually paraphrase a broader claim before the specific detail.

The detail being asked about is usually being used to flesh out an earlier, broader claim. Sometimes it’s being used to support a subsequent, broader claim.

In this case, it seems to be both.

The broader claim before the memorabilia detail is
“Until my present study, there has been [insufficient scholarship] on Tucker.”
The broader claim after the memorabilia detail is
“THESE ARTIFACTS, along with other stuff, shed some light on the [insufficient scholarship]”.

So the whole Purpose of the first paragraph is to make one big point:
1. There hasn’t been enough study on Tucker yet, but here comes mine

and then all the subsidiary details are just what info went into the study.

When you’re checking these answers, ask yourself, “IS this the broader point the author was making in this paragraph?”

(A) WAS the author listing sources of info used to study Tucker’s life and times? Yup.

(D) WAS the author trying to make a point about how diverse Tucker’s nonprofessional interests and accomplishments were? Doesn’t seem like it.

(E) WAS the author making a general point about the typical data available to people who study entertainers? Doesn’t seem like it.

Hope this helps.

[seychelles1718]

Doesn't (A) sound a lot like the typical trap answers in purpose of details questions (those that describe WHAT the detail does, not WHY it is there)? (A) definitely does describe what the detail in question is about.

[ohthatpatrick]

It does sound more like a neutral, descriptive purpose than one that's fueled with more opinion or rhetorical function.

There wasn't any framing idea preceding this detail, and there's only a weak framing idea supporting the detail ("THIS EVIDENCE ... helps shed new light")

So the correct answer might sound more literal than usual. If everything else is inaccurate, though, then it certainly becomes the 'best available' answer.