Card 0 of 12
Passage adapted from "Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall-Street" by Herman Melville (1853)
I am a rather elderly man. The nature of my avocations for the last thirty years has brought me into more than ordinary contact with what would seem an interesting and somewhat singular set of men, of whom as yet nothing that I know of has ever been written—I mean the law-copyists or scriveners. I have known very many of them, professionally and privately, and if I pleased, could relate divers histories, at which good-natured gentlemen might smile, and sentimental souls might weep. But I waive the biographies of all other scriveners for a few passages in the life of Bartleby, who was a scrivener of the strangest I ever saw or heard of. While of other law-copyists I might write the complete life, of Bartleby nothing of that sort can be done. I believe that no materials exist for a full and satisfactory biography of this man. It is an irreparable loss to literature. Bartleby was one of those beings of whom nothing is ascertainable, except from the original sources, and in his case those are very small. What my own astonished eyes saw of Bartleby, that is all I know of him, except, indeed, one vague report which will appear in the sequel.
Ere introducing the scrivener, as he first appeared to me, it is fit I make some mention of myself, my employees, my business, my chambers, and general surroundings; because some such description is indispensable to an adequate understanding of the chief character about to be presented.
Imprimis: I am a man who, from his youth upwards, has been filled with a profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best. Hence, though I belong to a profession proverbially energetic and nervous, even to turbulence, at times, yet nothing of that sort have I ever suffered to invade my peace. I am one of those unambitious lawyers who never addresses a jury, or in any way draws down public applause; but in the cool tranquility of a snug retreat, do a snug business among rich men's bonds and mortgages and title-deeds. All who know me, consider me an eminently safe man. The late John Jacob Astor, a personage little given to poetic enthusiasm, had no hesitation in pronouncing my first grand point to be prudence; my next, method. I do not speak it in vanity, but simply record the fact, that I was not unemployed in my profession by the late John Jacob Astor; a name which, I admit, I love to repeat, for it hath a rounded and orbicular sound to it, and rings like unto bullion. I will freely add, that I was not insensible to the late John Jacob Astor's good opinion.
The narrator's "profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best" is in direct contrast to the principles and actions of which notable character of American letters?
This question interrogates the test taker's knowledge of canon literature and characters. Note that you do NOT need to have read each of these books in order to answer this question, having even a cursory, summary knowledge of these canon books, or even the archetypes they spawned would be sufficient. Note also that you are looking for the best answer. You may have leftover questions about whether a character somewhat contrasts with this ethos, but you should really be looking for a clear, obvious contrast. In this spirit, the answer here is Captain Ahab, from Melville's most famous novel Moby Dick or The Whale. Even if you just knew anecdotally about this novel, or were familiar with the plot, which concerns Ahab's dogged, doomed quest to kill his white whale, you would know that Ahab, as a figure in American Literature, represents a total opposition from the conviction that the easiest way is the best, since he chooses an obsessive plot against any notion of even reasonable caution or leisure.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage adapted from Edna St. Vincent Millay's "Spring" (1921).
To what purpose, April, do you return again?
Beauty is not enough.
You can no longer quiet me with the redness
Of leaves opening stickily.
I know what I know. 5
The sun is hot on my neck as I observe
The spikes of the crocus.
The smell of the earth is good.
It is apparent that there is no death.
But what does that signify? 10
Not only under the ground are the brains of men
Eaten by maggots.
Life in itself
Is nothing,
An empty cup, a flight of uncarpeted stairs. 15
It is not enough that yearly, down this hill,
April
Comes like an idiot, babbling and strewing flowers.
Which of the given lines from a seminal American poem most directly contrasts the message of the passage?
All of the given passages were from poems directly concerned, as this poem is, with spring. None of these poems, however, are purely about that season, all demonstrate a distinct perspective on that season. This is where we need to query the lines, on the level of tone and the quality of the author's take on spring.
First, lets keep firmly in mind the perspective of the passage: namely that the beauty of spring is ultimately illusory and pointless. Now, this is a notably dark and unique perspective on what is, objectively, just a great time of year (in the Norther Hemisphere), so it stands to reason that most of these other passages will have a more positive perspective, we must look for the one that most directly contrasts with the message of the poem.
The key phrase in the correct answer is "yet I do not repine." By initially making statements in line with the message of our given passage ("spring decoys," "as the rose appears the Robin is gone") and then directly contrasting that sentiment with "yet," we see our most direct contrast to our given poem.
Answer options are adapted from: "A Prayer in Spring" by Robert Frost (1913), "A light exists in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1885), and "I have a bird in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1886), and "Very Early Spring" by Katherine Mansfield (who was from New Zealand) (1923).
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Adapted from Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence (1920)
It invariably happened in the same way.
Mrs. Julius Beaufort, on the night of her annual ball, never failed to appear at the Opera; indeed, she always gave her ball on an Opera night in order to emphasise her complete superiority to household cares, and her possession of a staff of servants competent to organise every detail of the entertainment in her absence.
The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ball–room (it antedated even Mrs. Manson Mingott's and the Headly Chiverses'); and at a time when it was beginning to be thought "provincial" to put a "crash" over the drawing–room floor and move the furniture upstairs, the possession of a ball–room that was used for no other purpose, and left for three–hundred–and–sixty–four days of the year to shuttered darkness, with its gilt chairs stacked in a corner and its chandelier in a bag; this undoubted superiority was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past.
Mrs. Archer, who was fond of coining her social philosophy into axioms, had once said: "We all have our pet common people—" and though the phrase was a daring one, its truth was secretly admitted in many an exclusive bosom. But the Beauforts were not exactly common; some people said they were even worse. Mrs. Beaufort belonged indeed to one of America's most honoured families; she had been the lovely Regina Dallas (of the South Carolina branch), a penniless beauty introduced to New York society by her cousin, the imprudent Medora Manson, who was always doing the wrong thing from the right motive. When one was related to the Mansons and the Rushworths one had a "droit de cite" (as Mr. Sillerton Jackson, who had frequented the Tuileries, called it) in New York society; but did one not forfeit it in marrying Julius Beaufort?
The question was: who was Beaufort? He passed for an Englishman, was agreeable, handsome, ill–tempered, hospitable and witty. He had come to America with letters of recommendation from old Mrs. Manson Mingott's English son–in–law, the banker, and had speedily made himself an important position in the world of affairs; but his habits were dissipated, his tongue was bitter, his antecedents were mysterious; and when Medora Manson announced her cousin's engagement to him it was felt to be one more act of folly in poor Medora's long record of imprudences.
But folly is as often justified of her children as wisdom, and two years after young Mrs. Beaufort's marriage it was admitted that she had the most distinguished house in New York. No one knew exactly how the miracle was accomplished. She was indolent, passive, the caustic even called her dull; but dressed like an idol, hung with pearls, growing younger and blonder and more beautiful each year, she throned in Mr. Beaufort's heavy brown–stone palace, and drew all the world there without lifting her jewelled little finger. The knowing people said it was Beaufort himself who trained the servants, taught the chef new dishes, told the gardeners what hot–house flowers to grow for the dinner–table and the drawing–rooms, selected the guests, brewed the after–dinner punch and dictated the little notes his wife wrote to her friends. If he did, these domestic activities were privately performed, and he presented to the world the appearance of a careless and hospitable millionaire strolling into his own drawing–room with the detachment of an invited guest, and saying: "My wife's gloxinias are a marvel, aren't they? I believe she gets them out from Kew."
Mr. Beaufort's secret, people were agreed, was the way he carried things off. It was all very well to whisper that he had been "helped" to leave England by the international banking–house in which he had been employed; he carried off that rumour as easily as the rest—though New York's business conscience was no less sensitive than its moral standard—he carried everything before him, and all New York into his drawing–rooms, and for over twenty years now people had said they were "going to the Beauforts'" with the same tone of security as if they had said they were going to Mrs. Manson Mingott's, and with the added satisfaction of knowing they would get hot canvas–back ducks and vintage wines, instead of tepid Veuve Clicquot without a year and warmed–up croquettes from Philadelphia.
Mrs. Beaufort, then, had as usual appeared in her box just before the Jewel Song; and when, again as usual, she rose at the end of the third act, drew her opera cloak about her lovely shoulders, and disappeared, New York knew that meant that half an hour later the ball would begin.
The primary focus of the work excerpted here is _______________.
The Age of Innocence is clearly a seminal work of American Literature. It was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1921, and Wharton became the first woman to be awarded the prize. So, it is reasonable to expect that you would have some prior knowledge of the work, or at least of Wharton's oeuvre of social satire and observation. But this knowledge simply would have made this question easier; the question is still eminently solvable, even if your only familiarity with the work came from the passage in front of you.
Remember, the answer to any question will always have direct evidence to support it in the passage itself. Now, the novel was written in 1920, so the option suggesting that a primary theme was the aftermath of World War I may be tempting, but there is no evidence of this in the text, no mention of that war, nor of any date (in fact, the novel is set in the Gilded Age of the 19th century). Text date is NOT evidence of the temporal setting of the story.
While it is suggested, at one point, that Mr. Beaufort is in some way deceptive (namely about being British), to say that the focus of the entire text is a criminal plot of his is not supportable with evidence.
The dynamics of social class and wealth are certainly at play in this passage, as evidenced by the fact that although they are apparently wealthy, the Beauforts are also referred to as "common." This kind of complex distinction reveals the inherent complexity of a nation focused on the pursuit of wealth, and without an underlying aristocratic history.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage adapted from "Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall-Street" by Herman Melville (1853)
I am a rather elderly man. The nature of my avocations for the last thirty years has brought me into more than ordinary contact with what would seem an interesting and somewhat singular set of men, of whom as yet nothing that I know of has ever been written—I mean the law-copyists or scriveners. I have known very many of them, professionally and privately, and if I pleased, could relate divers histories, at which good-natured gentlemen might smile, and sentimental souls might weep. But I waive the biographies of all other scriveners for a few passages in the life of Bartleby, who was a scrivener of the strangest I ever saw or heard of. While of other law-copyists I might write the complete life, of Bartleby nothing of that sort can be done. I believe that no materials exist for a full and satisfactory biography of this man. It is an irreparable loss to literature. Bartleby was one of those beings of whom nothing is ascertainable, except from the original sources, and in his case those are very small. What my own astonished eyes saw of Bartleby, that is all I know of him, except, indeed, one vague report which will appear in the sequel.
Ere introducing the scrivener, as he first appeared to me, it is fit I make some mention of myself, my employees, my business, my chambers, and general surroundings; because some such description is indispensable to an adequate understanding of the chief character about to be presented.
Imprimis: I am a man who, from his youth upwards, has been filled with a profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best. Hence, though I belong to a profession proverbially energetic and nervous, even to turbulence, at times, yet nothing of that sort have I ever suffered to invade my peace. I am one of those unambitious lawyers who never addresses a jury, or in any way draws down public applause; but in the cool tranquility of a snug retreat, do a snug business among rich men's bonds and mortgages and title-deeds. All who know me, consider me an eminently safe man. The late John Jacob Astor, a personage little given to poetic enthusiasm, had no hesitation in pronouncing my first grand point to be prudence; my next, method. I do not speak it in vanity, but simply record the fact, that I was not unemployed in my profession by the late John Jacob Astor; a name which, I admit, I love to repeat, for it hath a rounded and orbicular sound to it, and rings like unto bullion. I will freely add, that I was not insensible to the late John Jacob Astor's good opinion.
The narrator's "profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best" is in direct contrast to the principles and actions of which notable character of American letters?
This question interrogates the test taker's knowledge of canon literature and characters. Note that you do NOT need to have read each of these books in order to answer this question, having even a cursory, summary knowledge of these canon books, or even the archetypes they spawned would be sufficient. Note also that you are looking for the best answer. You may have leftover questions about whether a character somewhat contrasts with this ethos, but you should really be looking for a clear, obvious contrast. In this spirit, the answer here is Captain Ahab, from Melville's most famous novel Moby Dick or The Whale. Even if you just knew anecdotally about this novel, or were familiar with the plot, which concerns Ahab's dogged, doomed quest to kill his white whale, you would know that Ahab, as a figure in American Literature, represents a total opposition from the conviction that the easiest way is the best, since he chooses an obsessive plot against any notion of even reasonable caution or leisure.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage adapted from Edna St. Vincent Millay's "Spring" (1921).
To what purpose, April, do you return again?
Beauty is not enough.
You can no longer quiet me with the redness
Of leaves opening stickily.
I know what I know. 5
The sun is hot on my neck as I observe
The spikes of the crocus.
The smell of the earth is good.
It is apparent that there is no death.
But what does that signify? 10
Not only under the ground are the brains of men
Eaten by maggots.
Life in itself
Is nothing,
An empty cup, a flight of uncarpeted stairs. 15
It is not enough that yearly, down this hill,
April
Comes like an idiot, babbling and strewing flowers.
Which of the given lines from a seminal American poem most directly contrasts the message of the passage?
All of the given passages were from poems directly concerned, as this poem is, with spring. None of these poems, however, are purely about that season, all demonstrate a distinct perspective on that season. This is where we need to query the lines, on the level of tone and the quality of the author's take on spring.
First, lets keep firmly in mind the perspective of the passage: namely that the beauty of spring is ultimately illusory and pointless. Now, this is a notably dark and unique perspective on what is, objectively, just a great time of year (in the Norther Hemisphere), so it stands to reason that most of these other passages will have a more positive perspective, we must look for the one that most directly contrasts with the message of the poem.
The key phrase in the correct answer is "yet I do not repine." By initially making statements in line with the message of our given passage ("spring decoys," "as the rose appears the Robin is gone") and then directly contrasting that sentiment with "yet," we see our most direct contrast to our given poem.
Answer options are adapted from: "A Prayer in Spring" by Robert Frost (1913), "A light exists in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1885), and "I have a bird in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1886), and "Very Early Spring" by Katherine Mansfield (who was from New Zealand) (1923).
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Adapted from Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence (1920)
It invariably happened in the same way.
Mrs. Julius Beaufort, on the night of her annual ball, never failed to appear at the Opera; indeed, she always gave her ball on an Opera night in order to emphasise her complete superiority to household cares, and her possession of a staff of servants competent to organise every detail of the entertainment in her absence.
The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ball–room (it antedated even Mrs. Manson Mingott's and the Headly Chiverses'); and at a time when it was beginning to be thought "provincial" to put a "crash" over the drawing–room floor and move the furniture upstairs, the possession of a ball–room that was used for no other purpose, and left for three–hundred–and–sixty–four days of the year to shuttered darkness, with its gilt chairs stacked in a corner and its chandelier in a bag; this undoubted superiority was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past.
Mrs. Archer, who was fond of coining her social philosophy into axioms, had once said: "We all have our pet common people—" and though the phrase was a daring one, its truth was secretly admitted in many an exclusive bosom. But the Beauforts were not exactly common; some people said they were even worse. Mrs. Beaufort belonged indeed to one of America's most honoured families; she had been the lovely Regina Dallas (of the South Carolina branch), a penniless beauty introduced to New York society by her cousin, the imprudent Medora Manson, who was always doing the wrong thing from the right motive. When one was related to the Mansons and the Rushworths one had a "droit de cite" (as Mr. Sillerton Jackson, who had frequented the Tuileries, called it) in New York society; but did one not forfeit it in marrying Julius Beaufort?
The question was: who was Beaufort? He passed for an Englishman, was agreeable, handsome, ill–tempered, hospitable and witty. He had come to America with letters of recommendation from old Mrs. Manson Mingott's English son–in–law, the banker, and had speedily made himself an important position in the world of affairs; but his habits were dissipated, his tongue was bitter, his antecedents were mysterious; and when Medora Manson announced her cousin's engagement to him it was felt to be one more act of folly in poor Medora's long record of imprudences.
But folly is as often justified of her children as wisdom, and two years after young Mrs. Beaufort's marriage it was admitted that she had the most distinguished house in New York. No one knew exactly how the miracle was accomplished. She was indolent, passive, the caustic even called her dull; but dressed like an idol, hung with pearls, growing younger and blonder and more beautiful each year, she throned in Mr. Beaufort's heavy brown–stone palace, and drew all the world there without lifting her jewelled little finger. The knowing people said it was Beaufort himself who trained the servants, taught the chef new dishes, told the gardeners what hot–house flowers to grow for the dinner–table and the drawing–rooms, selected the guests, brewed the after–dinner punch and dictated the little notes his wife wrote to her friends. If he did, these domestic activities were privately performed, and he presented to the world the appearance of a careless and hospitable millionaire strolling into his own drawing–room with the detachment of an invited guest, and saying: "My wife's gloxinias are a marvel, aren't they? I believe she gets them out from Kew."
Mr. Beaufort's secret, people were agreed, was the way he carried things off. It was all very well to whisper that he had been "helped" to leave England by the international banking–house in which he had been employed; he carried off that rumour as easily as the rest—though New York's business conscience was no less sensitive than its moral standard—he carried everything before him, and all New York into his drawing–rooms, and for over twenty years now people had said they were "going to the Beauforts'" with the same tone of security as if they had said they were going to Mrs. Manson Mingott's, and with the added satisfaction of knowing they would get hot canvas–back ducks and vintage wines, instead of tepid Veuve Clicquot without a year and warmed–up croquettes from Philadelphia.
Mrs. Beaufort, then, had as usual appeared in her box just before the Jewel Song; and when, again as usual, she rose at the end of the third act, drew her opera cloak about her lovely shoulders, and disappeared, New York knew that meant that half an hour later the ball would begin.
The primary focus of the work excerpted here is _______________.
The Age of Innocence is clearly a seminal work of American Literature. It was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1921, and Wharton became the first woman to be awarded the prize. So, it is reasonable to expect that you would have some prior knowledge of the work, or at least of Wharton's oeuvre of social satire and observation. But this knowledge simply would have made this question easier; the question is still eminently solvable, even if your only familiarity with the work came from the passage in front of you.
Remember, the answer to any question will always have direct evidence to support it in the passage itself. Now, the novel was written in 1920, so the option suggesting that a primary theme was the aftermath of World War I may be tempting, but there is no evidence of this in the text, no mention of that war, nor of any date (in fact, the novel is set in the Gilded Age of the 19th century). Text date is NOT evidence of the temporal setting of the story.
While it is suggested, at one point, that Mr. Beaufort is in some way deceptive (namely about being British), to say that the focus of the entire text is a criminal plot of his is not supportable with evidence.
The dynamics of social class and wealth are certainly at play in this passage, as evidenced by the fact that although they are apparently wealthy, the Beauforts are also referred to as "common." This kind of complex distinction reveals the inherent complexity of a nation focused on the pursuit of wealth, and without an underlying aristocratic history.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage adapted from "Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall-Street" by Herman Melville (1853)
I am a rather elderly man. The nature of my avocations for the last thirty years has brought me into more than ordinary contact with what would seem an interesting and somewhat singular set of men, of whom as yet nothing that I know of has ever been written—I mean the law-copyists or scriveners. I have known very many of them, professionally and privately, and if I pleased, could relate divers histories, at which good-natured gentlemen might smile, and sentimental souls might weep. But I waive the biographies of all other scriveners for a few passages in the life of Bartleby, who was a scrivener of the strangest I ever saw or heard of. While of other law-copyists I might write the complete life, of Bartleby nothing of that sort can be done. I believe that no materials exist for a full and satisfactory biography of this man. It is an irreparable loss to literature. Bartleby was one of those beings of whom nothing is ascertainable, except from the original sources, and in his case those are very small. What my own astonished eyes saw of Bartleby, that is all I know of him, except, indeed, one vague report which will appear in the sequel.
Ere introducing the scrivener, as he first appeared to me, it is fit I make some mention of myself, my employees, my business, my chambers, and general surroundings; because some such description is indispensable to an adequate understanding of the chief character about to be presented.
Imprimis: I am a man who, from his youth upwards, has been filled with a profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best. Hence, though I belong to a profession proverbially energetic and nervous, even to turbulence, at times, yet nothing of that sort have I ever suffered to invade my peace. I am one of those unambitious lawyers who never addresses a jury, or in any way draws down public applause; but in the cool tranquility of a snug retreat, do a snug business among rich men's bonds and mortgages and title-deeds. All who know me, consider me an eminently safe man. The late John Jacob Astor, a personage little given to poetic enthusiasm, had no hesitation in pronouncing my first grand point to be prudence; my next, method. I do not speak it in vanity, but simply record the fact, that I was not unemployed in my profession by the late John Jacob Astor; a name which, I admit, I love to repeat, for it hath a rounded and orbicular sound to it, and rings like unto bullion. I will freely add, that I was not insensible to the late John Jacob Astor's good opinion.
The narrator's "profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best" is in direct contrast to the principles and actions of which notable character of American letters?
This question interrogates the test taker's knowledge of canon literature and characters. Note that you do NOT need to have read each of these books in order to answer this question, having even a cursory, summary knowledge of these canon books, or even the archetypes they spawned would be sufficient. Note also that you are looking for the best answer. You may have leftover questions about whether a character somewhat contrasts with this ethos, but you should really be looking for a clear, obvious contrast. In this spirit, the answer here is Captain Ahab, from Melville's most famous novel Moby Dick or The Whale. Even if you just knew anecdotally about this novel, or were familiar with the plot, which concerns Ahab's dogged, doomed quest to kill his white whale, you would know that Ahab, as a figure in American Literature, represents a total opposition from the conviction that the easiest way is the best, since he chooses an obsessive plot against any notion of even reasonable caution or leisure.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage adapted from Edna St. Vincent Millay's "Spring" (1921).
To what purpose, April, do you return again?
Beauty is not enough.
You can no longer quiet me with the redness
Of leaves opening stickily.
I know what I know. 5
The sun is hot on my neck as I observe
The spikes of the crocus.
The smell of the earth is good.
It is apparent that there is no death.
But what does that signify? 10
Not only under the ground are the brains of men
Eaten by maggots.
Life in itself
Is nothing,
An empty cup, a flight of uncarpeted stairs. 15
It is not enough that yearly, down this hill,
April
Comes like an idiot, babbling and strewing flowers.
Which of the given lines from a seminal American poem most directly contrasts the message of the passage?
All of the given passages were from poems directly concerned, as this poem is, with spring. None of these poems, however, are purely about that season, all demonstrate a distinct perspective on that season. This is where we need to query the lines, on the level of tone and the quality of the author's take on spring.
First, lets keep firmly in mind the perspective of the passage: namely that the beauty of spring is ultimately illusory and pointless. Now, this is a notably dark and unique perspective on what is, objectively, just a great time of year (in the Norther Hemisphere), so it stands to reason that most of these other passages will have a more positive perspective, we must look for the one that most directly contrasts with the message of the poem.
The key phrase in the correct answer is "yet I do not repine." By initially making statements in line with the message of our given passage ("spring decoys," "as the rose appears the Robin is gone") and then directly contrasting that sentiment with "yet," we see our most direct contrast to our given poem.
Answer options are adapted from: "A Prayer in Spring" by Robert Frost (1913), "A light exists in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1885), and "I have a bird in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1886), and "Very Early Spring" by Katherine Mansfield (who was from New Zealand) (1923).
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Adapted from Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence (1920)
It invariably happened in the same way.
Mrs. Julius Beaufort, on the night of her annual ball, never failed to appear at the Opera; indeed, she always gave her ball on an Opera night in order to emphasise her complete superiority to household cares, and her possession of a staff of servants competent to organise every detail of the entertainment in her absence.
The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ball–room (it antedated even Mrs. Manson Mingott's and the Headly Chiverses'); and at a time when it was beginning to be thought "provincial" to put a "crash" over the drawing–room floor and move the furniture upstairs, the possession of a ball–room that was used for no other purpose, and left for three–hundred–and–sixty–four days of the year to shuttered darkness, with its gilt chairs stacked in a corner and its chandelier in a bag; this undoubted superiority was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past.
Mrs. Archer, who was fond of coining her social philosophy into axioms, had once said: "We all have our pet common people—" and though the phrase was a daring one, its truth was secretly admitted in many an exclusive bosom. But the Beauforts were not exactly common; some people said they were even worse. Mrs. Beaufort belonged indeed to one of America's most honoured families; she had been the lovely Regina Dallas (of the South Carolina branch), a penniless beauty introduced to New York society by her cousin, the imprudent Medora Manson, who was always doing the wrong thing from the right motive. When one was related to the Mansons and the Rushworths one had a "droit de cite" (as Mr. Sillerton Jackson, who had frequented the Tuileries, called it) in New York society; but did one not forfeit it in marrying Julius Beaufort?
The question was: who was Beaufort? He passed for an Englishman, was agreeable, handsome, ill–tempered, hospitable and witty. He had come to America with letters of recommendation from old Mrs. Manson Mingott's English son–in–law, the banker, and had speedily made himself an important position in the world of affairs; but his habits were dissipated, his tongue was bitter, his antecedents were mysterious; and when Medora Manson announced her cousin's engagement to him it was felt to be one more act of folly in poor Medora's long record of imprudences.
But folly is as often justified of her children as wisdom, and two years after young Mrs. Beaufort's marriage it was admitted that she had the most distinguished house in New York. No one knew exactly how the miracle was accomplished. She was indolent, passive, the caustic even called her dull; but dressed like an idol, hung with pearls, growing younger and blonder and more beautiful each year, she throned in Mr. Beaufort's heavy brown–stone palace, and drew all the world there without lifting her jewelled little finger. The knowing people said it was Beaufort himself who trained the servants, taught the chef new dishes, told the gardeners what hot–house flowers to grow for the dinner–table and the drawing–rooms, selected the guests, brewed the after–dinner punch and dictated the little notes his wife wrote to her friends. If he did, these domestic activities were privately performed, and he presented to the world the appearance of a careless and hospitable millionaire strolling into his own drawing–room with the detachment of an invited guest, and saying: "My wife's gloxinias are a marvel, aren't they? I believe she gets them out from Kew."
Mr. Beaufort's secret, people were agreed, was the way he carried things off. It was all very well to whisper that he had been "helped" to leave England by the international banking–house in which he had been employed; he carried off that rumour as easily as the rest—though New York's business conscience was no less sensitive than its moral standard—he carried everything before him, and all New York into his drawing–rooms, and for over twenty years now people had said they were "going to the Beauforts'" with the same tone of security as if they had said they were going to Mrs. Manson Mingott's, and with the added satisfaction of knowing they would get hot canvas–back ducks and vintage wines, instead of tepid Veuve Clicquot without a year and warmed–up croquettes from Philadelphia.
Mrs. Beaufort, then, had as usual appeared in her box just before the Jewel Song; and when, again as usual, she rose at the end of the third act, drew her opera cloak about her lovely shoulders, and disappeared, New York knew that meant that half an hour later the ball would begin.
The primary focus of the work excerpted here is _______________.
The Age of Innocence is clearly a seminal work of American Literature. It was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1921, and Wharton became the first woman to be awarded the prize. So, it is reasonable to expect that you would have some prior knowledge of the work, or at least of Wharton's oeuvre of social satire and observation. But this knowledge simply would have made this question easier; the question is still eminently solvable, even if your only familiarity with the work came from the passage in front of you.
Remember, the answer to any question will always have direct evidence to support it in the passage itself. Now, the novel was written in 1920, so the option suggesting that a primary theme was the aftermath of World War I may be tempting, but there is no evidence of this in the text, no mention of that war, nor of any date (in fact, the novel is set in the Gilded Age of the 19th century). Text date is NOT evidence of the temporal setting of the story.
While it is suggested, at one point, that Mr. Beaufort is in some way deceptive (namely about being British), to say that the focus of the entire text is a criminal plot of his is not supportable with evidence.
The dynamics of social class and wealth are certainly at play in this passage, as evidenced by the fact that although they are apparently wealthy, the Beauforts are also referred to as "common." This kind of complex distinction reveals the inherent complexity of a nation focused on the pursuit of wealth, and without an underlying aristocratic history.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage adapted from "Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall-Street" by Herman Melville (1853)
I am a rather elderly man. The nature of my avocations for the last thirty years has brought me into more than ordinary contact with what would seem an interesting and somewhat singular set of men, of whom as yet nothing that I know of has ever been written—I mean the law-copyists or scriveners. I have known very many of them, professionally and privately, and if I pleased, could relate divers histories, at which good-natured gentlemen might smile, and sentimental souls might weep. But I waive the biographies of all other scriveners for a few passages in the life of Bartleby, who was a scrivener of the strangest I ever saw or heard of. While of other law-copyists I might write the complete life, of Bartleby nothing of that sort can be done. I believe that no materials exist for a full and satisfactory biography of this man. It is an irreparable loss to literature. Bartleby was one of those beings of whom nothing is ascertainable, except from the original sources, and in his case those are very small. What my own astonished eyes saw of Bartleby, that is all I know of him, except, indeed, one vague report which will appear in the sequel.
Ere introducing the scrivener, as he first appeared to me, it is fit I make some mention of myself, my employees, my business, my chambers, and general surroundings; because some such description is indispensable to an adequate understanding of the chief character about to be presented.
Imprimis: I am a man who, from his youth upwards, has been filled with a profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best. Hence, though I belong to a profession proverbially energetic and nervous, even to turbulence, at times, yet nothing of that sort have I ever suffered to invade my peace. I am one of those unambitious lawyers who never addresses a jury, or in any way draws down public applause; but in the cool tranquility of a snug retreat, do a snug business among rich men's bonds and mortgages and title-deeds. All who know me, consider me an eminently safe man. The late John Jacob Astor, a personage little given to poetic enthusiasm, had no hesitation in pronouncing my first grand point to be prudence; my next, method. I do not speak it in vanity, but simply record the fact, that I was not unemployed in my profession by the late John Jacob Astor; a name which, I admit, I love to repeat, for it hath a rounded and orbicular sound to it, and rings like unto bullion. I will freely add, that I was not insensible to the late John Jacob Astor's good opinion.
The narrator's "profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best" is in direct contrast to the principles and actions of which notable character of American letters?
This question interrogates the test taker's knowledge of canon literature and characters. Note that you do NOT need to have read each of these books in order to answer this question, having even a cursory, summary knowledge of these canon books, or even the archetypes they spawned would be sufficient. Note also that you are looking for the best answer. You may have leftover questions about whether a character somewhat contrasts with this ethos, but you should really be looking for a clear, obvious contrast. In this spirit, the answer here is Captain Ahab, from Melville's most famous novel Moby Dick or The Whale. Even if you just knew anecdotally about this novel, or were familiar with the plot, which concerns Ahab's dogged, doomed quest to kill his white whale, you would know that Ahab, as a figure in American Literature, represents a total opposition from the conviction that the easiest way is the best, since he chooses an obsessive plot against any notion of even reasonable caution or leisure.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Passage adapted from Edna St. Vincent Millay's "Spring" (1921).
To what purpose, April, do you return again?
Beauty is not enough.
You can no longer quiet me with the redness
Of leaves opening stickily.
I know what I know. 5
The sun is hot on my neck as I observe
The spikes of the crocus.
The smell of the earth is good.
It is apparent that there is no death.
But what does that signify? 10
Not only under the ground are the brains of men
Eaten by maggots.
Life in itself
Is nothing,
An empty cup, a flight of uncarpeted stairs. 15
It is not enough that yearly, down this hill,
April
Comes like an idiot, babbling and strewing flowers.
Which of the given lines from a seminal American poem most directly contrasts the message of the passage?
All of the given passages were from poems directly concerned, as this poem is, with spring. None of these poems, however, are purely about that season, all demonstrate a distinct perspective on that season. This is where we need to query the lines, on the level of tone and the quality of the author's take on spring.
First, lets keep firmly in mind the perspective of the passage: namely that the beauty of spring is ultimately illusory and pointless. Now, this is a notably dark and unique perspective on what is, objectively, just a great time of year (in the Norther Hemisphere), so it stands to reason that most of these other passages will have a more positive perspective, we must look for the one that most directly contrasts with the message of the poem.
The key phrase in the correct answer is "yet I do not repine." By initially making statements in line with the message of our given passage ("spring decoys," "as the rose appears the Robin is gone") and then directly contrasting that sentiment with "yet," we see our most direct contrast to our given poem.
Answer options are adapted from: "A Prayer in Spring" by Robert Frost (1913), "A light exists in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1885), and "I have a bird in Spring" by Emily Dickinson (1886), and "Very Early Spring" by Katherine Mansfield (who was from New Zealand) (1923).
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Adapted from Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence (1920)
It invariably happened in the same way.
Mrs. Julius Beaufort, on the night of her annual ball, never failed to appear at the Opera; indeed, she always gave her ball on an Opera night in order to emphasise her complete superiority to household cares, and her possession of a staff of servants competent to organise every detail of the entertainment in her absence.
The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ball–room (it antedated even Mrs. Manson Mingott's and the Headly Chiverses'); and at a time when it was beginning to be thought "provincial" to put a "crash" over the drawing–room floor and move the furniture upstairs, the possession of a ball–room that was used for no other purpose, and left for three–hundred–and–sixty–four days of the year to shuttered darkness, with its gilt chairs stacked in a corner and its chandelier in a bag; this undoubted superiority was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past.
Mrs. Archer, who was fond of coining her social philosophy into axioms, had once said: "We all have our pet common people—" and though the phrase was a daring one, its truth was secretly admitted in many an exclusive bosom. But the Beauforts were not exactly common; some people said they were even worse. Mrs. Beaufort belonged indeed to one of America's most honoured families; she had been the lovely Regina Dallas (of the South Carolina branch), a penniless beauty introduced to New York society by her cousin, the imprudent Medora Manson, who was always doing the wrong thing from the right motive. When one was related to the Mansons and the Rushworths one had a "droit de cite" (as Mr. Sillerton Jackson, who had frequented the Tuileries, called it) in New York society; but did one not forfeit it in marrying Julius Beaufort?
The question was: who was Beaufort? He passed for an Englishman, was agreeable, handsome, ill–tempered, hospitable and witty. He had come to America with letters of recommendation from old Mrs. Manson Mingott's English son–in–law, the banker, and had speedily made himself an important position in the world of affairs; but his habits were dissipated, his tongue was bitter, his antecedents were mysterious; and when Medora Manson announced her cousin's engagement to him it was felt to be one more act of folly in poor Medora's long record of imprudences.
But folly is as often justified of her children as wisdom, and two years after young Mrs. Beaufort's marriage it was admitted that she had the most distinguished house in New York. No one knew exactly how the miracle was accomplished. She was indolent, passive, the caustic even called her dull; but dressed like an idol, hung with pearls, growing younger and blonder and more beautiful each year, she throned in Mr. Beaufort's heavy brown–stone palace, and drew all the world there without lifting her jewelled little finger. The knowing people said it was Beaufort himself who trained the servants, taught the chef new dishes, told the gardeners what hot–house flowers to grow for the dinner–table and the drawing–rooms, selected the guests, brewed the after–dinner punch and dictated the little notes his wife wrote to her friends. If he did, these domestic activities were privately performed, and he presented to the world the appearance of a careless and hospitable millionaire strolling into his own drawing–room with the detachment of an invited guest, and saying: "My wife's gloxinias are a marvel, aren't they? I believe she gets them out from Kew."
Mr. Beaufort's secret, people were agreed, was the way he carried things off. It was all very well to whisper that he had been "helped" to leave England by the international banking–house in which he had been employed; he carried off that rumour as easily as the rest—though New York's business conscience was no less sensitive than its moral standard—he carried everything before him, and all New York into his drawing–rooms, and for over twenty years now people had said they were "going to the Beauforts'" with the same tone of security as if they had said they were going to Mrs. Manson Mingott's, and with the added satisfaction of knowing they would get hot canvas–back ducks and vintage wines, instead of tepid Veuve Clicquot without a year and warmed–up croquettes from Philadelphia.
Mrs. Beaufort, then, had as usual appeared in her box just before the Jewel Song; and when, again as usual, she rose at the end of the third act, drew her opera cloak about her lovely shoulders, and disappeared, New York knew that meant that half an hour later the ball would begin.
The primary focus of the work excerpted here is _______________.
The Age of Innocence is clearly a seminal work of American Literature. It was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1921, and Wharton became the first woman to be awarded the prize. So, it is reasonable to expect that you would have some prior knowledge of the work, or at least of Wharton's oeuvre of social satire and observation. But this knowledge simply would have made this question easier; the question is still eminently solvable, even if your only familiarity with the work came from the passage in front of you.
Remember, the answer to any question will always have direct evidence to support it in the passage itself. Now, the novel was written in 1920, so the option suggesting that a primary theme was the aftermath of World War I may be tempting, but there is no evidence of this in the text, no mention of that war, nor of any date (in fact, the novel is set in the Gilded Age of the 19th century). Text date is NOT evidence of the temporal setting of the story.
While it is suggested, at one point, that Mr. Beaufort is in some way deceptive (namely about being British), to say that the focus of the entire text is a criminal plot of his is not supportable with evidence.
The dynamics of social class and wealth are certainly at play in this passage, as evidenced by the fact that although they are apparently wealthy, the Beauforts are also referred to as "common." This kind of complex distinction reveals the inherent complexity of a nation focused on the pursuit of wealth, and without an underlying aristocratic history.
Compare your answer with the correct one above