Reading comp PrepTest 155 · Section 3 · Question 4
Passage
The following passage is adapted from a 2001 article by a film historian. In exhibiting works of art—whether in a
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary Topic:
Humanities
Paragraph 1
While retrospectives of early nonfiction films have become increasingly common, presenting similar films is dull and inauthentic.
Key Lines?
Paragraph 1, Sentence 5 (P1, S5) - Common approach described
P2, S1 - Author's central criticism
Meta-Structure?
Criticizing a Viewpoint: This passage utilizes a Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure*. After describing one approach to exhibiting art and films (showing similar works/films), the author uses the second and third paragraphs to criticize this approach in the context of early nonfiction film retrospectives. The author contends that showing similar early films is dull and inauthentic, since that's not how such films would have been screened at the time of their release.
In a Criticizing a Viewpoint passage, the author's central criticism is the main point. So, we've summarized the main point as, "While retrospectives of early nonfiction films have become increasingly common, presenting similar films is dull and inauthentic."
*Some may argue that this passage has a Correcting the Record, Rebutting Critics, or Old Approach/New Approach Meta-Structure — understandably so, since there's considerable overlap between these Meta-Structures and the Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure. If you went with either of these, that's OK! You'd wind up with the same main point and big-picture understanding of the passage described above. However, some may see the question presented in the first paragraph ("which works [of art] should be exhibited together?") and conclude that this is a Question/Answer passage. The author doesn't spend much time answering that question, though. The author spends most of the passage criticizing one specific answer to that question ("collecting the similar') in one specific context of exhibitions (retrospectives of early films). So, viewing this as a Question/Answer passage may give us misimpressions about the passage.
Comparison: The most prominent minor Meta-Structure in this passage is the comparison. The author makes three comparisons, outlined in the Passage Summary above. We recommend highlighting or underlining these, as at least one is likely to factor into answering a question.
Last Thoughts?
There is a *lot* of the author's attitude in this passage, as you can see in the Passage Summary above. We should have highlighted quite a bit of the passage. While the author offers many critiques in this passage, it's easy to assume that the author's criticism is extreme. But, as always, we need to pay close attention to the author's word choice. In this case, viewing the author's criticism as extreme is supported — the author says screening similar early nonfiction films is "profoundly dull for the viewer" (P2, S2) and says such an "inauthentic" display robs the films' "life and context" (P3, S5). In other passages, however, an author with many opinions has somewhat tempered or nuanced views.
Humanities
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- Question posed (how to exhibit art) and common approach described ("collecting the similar" in art and film exhibitions)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Common approach:
- Show works with common elements (second through last sentences)
- Examples of common approaches:
- Works from the same artist, like Rembrandt (second and third sentences)
- Works of the same theme or historical period, like Modernism (fourth sentence)
- Film retrospectives that include several films from the same direct, star, or studio (seventh sentence)
- Author's attitude: "Another reasonable method might be" (fourth sentence)
- Common approach:
- Paragraph note
- Author's criticism of the common approach (retrospectives of early nonfiction films are inappropriate because they were supporting films)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Author's view:
- Showing similar early films — especially nonfiction films — is extremely boring because they were usually supporting films, and the retrospective makes them the main attraction (first through third sentences)
- Comparisons, according to the author:
- Early film audiences saw a mix of different types of films, but retrospectives tend to show the same type of film (first and fourth sentences)
- This viewing experience is useful for academics but is very boring for audiences (second sentencing)
- Author's view:
- Author's attitude: "often inappropriate" (first sentence); "especially nonfiction" (first sentence); "which would never have been the practice at the time" (first sentence); "while useful for historians and academics, is often profoundly dull for the viewer" (second sentence); "have always been supporting films" (third sentence)
- Paragraph note
- Author's criticism of the common approach (irony that attention is spent on making the film "authentic" but not the presentation)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Comparison, according to the author:
- Restorations of early films are touted as being authentic, while the exhibitions of such films is inauthentic
- Author's attitude: "often behave as if the production of the films were the only side of the coin" (first sentence); "authenticity is sometimes allowed to go out the window'" (fourth sentence); "inauthentic setting, utterly shorn of the program that once gave these films life and context" (fifth sentence); "magic of programming" (sixth sentence); "more like inherited it" (sixth sentence); "ill behooves us alleged early film lovers" (last sentence
- Comparison, according to the author:
While retrospectives of early nonfiction films have become increasingly common, presenting similar films is dull and inauthentic.
Key Lines?
Paragraph 1, Sentence 5 (P1, S5) - Common approach described
P2, S1 - Author's central criticism
Meta-Structure?
Criticizing a Viewpoint: This passage utilizes a Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure*. After describing one approach to exhibiting art and films (showing similar works/films), the author uses the second and third paragraphs to criticize this approach in the context of early nonfiction film retrospectives. The author contends that showing similar early films is dull and inauthentic, since that's not how such films would have been screened at the time of their release.
In a Criticizing a Viewpoint passage, the author's central criticism is the main point. So, we've summarized the main point as, "While retrospectives of early nonfiction films have become increasingly common, presenting similar films is dull and inauthentic."
*Some may argue that this passage has a Correcting the Record, Rebutting Critics, or Old Approach/New Approach Meta-Structure — understandably so, since there's considerable overlap between these Meta-Structures and the Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure. If you went with either of these, that's OK! You'd wind up with the same main point and big-picture understanding of the passage described above. However, some may see the question presented in the first paragraph ("which works [of art] should be exhibited together?") and conclude that this is a Question/Answer passage. The author doesn't spend much time answering that question, though. The author spends most of the passage criticizing one specific answer to that question ("collecting the similar') in one specific context of exhibitions (retrospectives of early films). So, viewing this as a Question/Answer passage may give us misimpressions about the passage.
Comparison: The most prominent minor Meta-Structure in this passage is the comparison. The author makes three comparisons, outlined in the Passage Summary above. We recommend highlighting or underlining these, as at least one is likely to factor into answering a question.
Last Thoughts?
There is a *lot* of the author's attitude in this passage, as you can see in the Passage Summary above. We should have highlighted quite a bit of the passage. While the author offers many critiques in this passage, it's easy to assume that the author's criticism is extreme. But, as always, we need to pay close attention to the author's word choice. In this case, viewing the author's criticism as extreme is supported — the author says screening similar early nonfiction films is "profoundly dull for the viewer" (P2, S2) and says such an "inauthentic" display robs the films' "life and context" (P3, S5). In other passages, however, an author with many opinions has somewhat tempered or nuanced views.
Question prompt
The passage contains information
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: C
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Humanities
Answer choices
-
AHow many nonfiction films Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Is this related to the main point or reflected in our notes for each paragraph?
No, neither reflected the amount of early nonfiction films, so we'd defer on this answer.
If we had to review the passage, we wouldn't find the answer to this question even if we re-read the entire passage. -
BDid directors of early Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Is this related to the main point or reflected in our notes for each paragraph?
Nope. Neither our anticipated main point nor our notes bring up early nonfiction films' directors or their filmography. So, we can table (B) and assess the remaining choices.
If we had to review the passage, we wouldn't find the answer to this question even if we re-read the entire passage. -
CHow long were most Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C matches the stem
Question Type:
Minor Point/Must Be True
Strategy Overview:
Remind ourselves of the main point of the passage, then head to the answers, focusing on those that line up with the main point and then using our notes/the passage to find the correct answer Answer Anticipation:
This is a variation of a Must Be True question. In this question, each answer choice is, Jeopardy-style, in the form of a question. The correct answer will feature a question that the passage answers. The four incorrect answers will present a question that the passage doesn't answer. These questions generally provide no indication as to the topic of the correct answer or where it'll show up in the passage. As such, we'll need to rely on our big-picture understanding of the passage to answer this question. We should start by reminding ourselves of the main point (either by reviewing what we said after reading the passage or by re-reading our answer to the main point question). From there, we can head to the answer choices. If we can't recall the answer to a question in a given answer choice, or if a possible answer isn't related to the main point or reflected in our notes, we shouldn't comb through the passage, searching for an answer. Instead, we'll table that answer choice and move on to the next one. If we can recall the answer to a question — even vaguely — we'll use our notes/highlights/underlines to find the part of the passage that provides the answer. If we can point to the answer in the passage, we'll select that answer choice and move on to the next question.
Answer Choice Explanation:
Is this related to the main point or reflected in our notes for each paragraph?
Part of the author's main point is that showing several different nonfiction films together is inauthentic because original audiences watched several different types of films. Moreover, our note for the second paragraph says that early nonfiction films are "supporting films." Both of these suggest that early films are short. Experienced test-takers might review the passage to determine whether it answers this question.
Heading back to the passage, we can find information about length in the middle of Paragraph 2, where we noted there were problems with showing the films in succession. There, it says that most early films were under fifteen minutes (P2, S2), confirming that (C) is correct.
Key Takeaway:
Once again, this was a global question. While we should try to anticipate the answer whenever possible, there will be plenty of times in RC questions that you'll be flying a bit blind. -
DOut of what historical Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Is this related to the main point or reflected in our notes for each paragraph?
Nope. "Director's cuts" was not a component of our main point or notes, so we can table (D) and keep looking (assuming we hadn't already selected the correct answer and moved on).
That said, many test-takers are tempted by this option since they likely remember the reference to "directors' cuts" from the last paragraph. This answer choice is trying to get you to conflate the discussion of a director's cut in the first half of the last paragraph with the discussion of the vaudeville tradition in the second half, after it had shifted the discussion. We noted in that paragraph that there was a discussion of authenticity in two contexts, so seeing that these elements were split between those sections shows that this answer choice is incorrect. -
EHow popular were early Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Is this related to the main point or reflected in our notes for each paragraph?
Nope. Popularity does not factor into our anticipated main point nor our notes. We can table this one and review any options we haven't already eliminated.
If we needed to review the passage (perhaps by searching for "travelogue" or "news" using CTRL/Command + F), we'd see that the passage only metion travelogues and news once, but doesn't bring up their popularity (P2, S4).
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
Deeper help
Ask follow-ups on any step
Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.
Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.
Discussion
-
Started by Nativeguy