PT155 S3 P1 Q6 ExplanationScreening Nonfiction Films

Answer choices, explained

1. A

   Unknown Comparison: less interesting13% picked this

   An exhibition of works by a single artist is likely to be less interesting than an exhibition that contains a mixture

   This seems to be referencing the early sentences of the passage, before the author's opinion had even appeared. The author didn't have any inherent preference for an exhibition of mixed artists over an exhibition of a single artist. The author actually says, "we might have an exhibition of Rembrandt's paintings (single artist). Another reasonable method might be to choose paintings with a particular theme or period (different artists)."

   13%
2. B

   Correct64% picked this

   When several works of art are exhibited together, the audience’s response can be greatly affected by the

   Why this is right

   This underlies the author's main point. The author cares a lot about the interplay of a night of mixed programming (drama, comedy, travelogue, and news), because she thinks that when several works of early nonfiction are exhibited together, "it is often profoundly dull for the viewer". Since the author's big recommendation is that, "The screening of these early nonfiction films would be better off if they were presented in the context of a night of mixed programming", she must believe that the context in which a work is seen matters. Thus, she probably thinks that the audience's response is affected by the interplay among those works.

   Skill tested: Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   64%
3. C

   Opposite, if anything7% picked this

   Film archives and retrospective festivals are too beholden to practices that have their roots in

   The author is actually encouraging the people who screen early nonfiction films to take heed of the wisdom of the vaudeville tradition, in terms of presenting a night of mixed programming. The author thinks it would "ill behoove us" (do us badly) "to forsake their insights".

   7%
4. D

   Too Strong5% picked this

   Most early cinemagoers did not think of nonfiction films of the time as belonging to a separate genre

   Too Strong: most Goes Against Common Sense We can't make any generalization about what's true of more than 50% of early cinemagoers' beliefs. While an early cinemagoer would have been unsurprised to go to a theater and see nonfiction films as well as comedies and dramas, that doesn't mean that they thought of all three as belonging to the same genre.

   5%
5. E

   Too Strong11% picked this

   A work of art will be misunderstood by historians or academics unless it is viewed

   Too Strong: will / unless Academics vs. Audiences The author cares a lot about presenting early nonfiction films in an authentic setting, but she does so for the sake of normal audiences. She says in the 2nd paragraph: Gathering together several short films by the same maker or studio, while useful for historians and academics, is often profoundly dull for the viewer. So the author is worried that these early nonfiction films will not be appreciated as much by audiences unless they're presented in an authentic context of a night of mixed programming. But this answer is making a strong claim about all works of art that they will definitely be misunderstood by historians and academics if they aren't presented in an authentic setting.

   11%