PrepTest 131

[lcid:3623] Prep Test 131 LSAT — Reading Comp — S4 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 16-22  .        The Japanese American sculptor Isamu Noguchi  . (1904–1988) was an artist who intuitively asked—and  . responded Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Humanities


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Background on Noguchi (deeply original, creative, followed a unique path) and preview of sculpture example
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Noguchi asked and responded to deeply original questions in his art; he charted a unique path in his career (first and second sentences)
    • Comparison, according to the author:
      • Noguchi was like a scientist and could have become one (second sentence)
    • Example of Noguchi's creativity, according to the author:
      • The story behind a sculpture (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "intuitively asked—and responded to—deeply original questions" (first sentence); "repeatedly veered off at wide angles" (second sentence); "creativeness" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Noguchi's background (early promise; Brancusi's stonecutter) and observation (sculptors have only used negative light/shadow)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparison, according to Noguchi:
      • Sculptors have used negative light (i.e., shadow) because only gold is reliably shiny (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "exquisite comprehension" (first sentence); "deft conceptual realization" (first sentence); "scientist's mind" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Noguchi's goal (purely reflective sculpture) and suggested approach (chrome-nickel steel, a permanently reflective surface now available due to Ford)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Noguchi's view:
      • Wanted to create a purely reflective, positive-light sculpture (first sentence)
    • Comparisons, according to the author/Fuller:
      • Like nonoxidizing gold, chrome-nickel steel is permanently reflective; unlike nonoxidizing gold, chrome-nickel steel is cheap and available in mass quantities (third and last sentences)

Paragraph 4

  • Paragraph note
    • Description of sculpture ("invisible" surface that is noticed only when other objects change in reflection) and analogy (still waters)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Noguchi's view:
      • A positive-light sculpture would be "invisible," seen only when objects surrounding it change (fourth through last sentences)
    • Comparison, according to the author/Noguchi:
      • The surface of Noguchi's sculpture is like the surface of still water — it is only seen in reflection (second sentence)

Paragraph 5

  • Paragraph note
    • After the sculpture (praised but Noguchi moved on)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view
      • Even after Noguchi received praise for his discovery, he kept on innovating/evolving (first and last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "stunning discovery" (first sentence); "inquisitive nature" (first sentence); "the genius of his original and fundamental conception" (second sentence); "next phase of his evolution" (second sentence)

Main Point: Noguchi confronted original questions and continually innovated in his sculptures, as is illustrated by a particular reflective sculpture of Fuller.

Meta-Structure?

Generalization/Example: Check out the last sentence of the first paragraph. There, we're essentially told that the author is going to use the Generalization/Example Meta-Structure as a central feature of the passage.* The author opens the passage by claiming that Noguchi was innovative throughout his career and then closes out that paragraph by saying that one work exemplifies this general characterization of the sculptor. That example is discussed throughout the rest of the passage (except the last paragraph, but even that's used to reinforce the general point about Noguchi's boundless and restless innovation).

When a passage relies on a Generalization/Example Meta-Structure, the main piont is the author's generalization or a variation of, "[The specific example] illustrates [the generalization]. ") So, we used that template for our anticipated main point.

*That said, other Meta-Structures could apply to this passage. Most obviously, this passage conforms to the Innovative [Subject] Meta-Structure, with the place holder "[Subject]" standing in for "Artist" (Noguchi) or "Sculpture" (Fuller sculpture). We could also think of this as a Problem/Solution passage, where Noguchi looks for a way to rely on positive light in a sculpture (the problem) and eventually lands on chrome-nickel steel (the solution).

Last Thoughts?

That fourth paragraph is dense and hard to understand. However, it describes the innovative sculpture, so it's important to have some handle on what it's talking about. The analogy is there to help you wrap your head around it (pun completely intended). From that paragraph, we know that the sculpture is "invisible" in that it can only be seen through the reflections in the metal. And in that way, it's like the surface of a lake - you can't really see that surface, but you can see the trees, sun, and clouds reflected in it to know where it is. Let's keep that image in mind since it's likely more familiar than a portrait of Fuller sculpted out of chrome-nickel steel!

Question prompt

The passage offers the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: D

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Humanities

Strategy Overview

Review the main point, and use notes or highlighted/underlined text in the passage to recall the author’s attitude, and find the answer that best reflects your understanding of the main point/author’s attitude

Answer Anticipation

This question asks us about the author's view but doesn't provide any insight into the topic of the correct answer or where the supporting information might show up in the passage. This means the correct answer is likely to relate back to the author's main point. 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 rereading our answer to the main point question). We can also review any notes about the author's attitude or any text we highlighted because it expresses the author's opinion. After doing that, we can head to the answer choices, tabling those that don't line up with the main point. For those answer choices that conform to the author’s main point, we'll use our notes and the passage to see if they’re correct.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Noguchi's work in Paris Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes on the author's argument?

    No. Our note for the second paragraph mentions that as Noguchi worked as "Brancusi's stonecutter," he had the observation that "sculptors have only used negative light/shadow." The author would probably agree that this observation "contributed significantly to the art of sculpture." But our notes don't suggest that Noguchi had pursued the work that this observation inspired in Paris. And they don't suggest that Brancusi had attempted to solve the problems associated with this type of work. Therefore, we should curb any desire to check the passage, eliminate or table (A), and check the next answer choice.

    But if we had to review the passage, we wouldn't find any support for (A). Noguchi's key observation leading to his innovation was that sculptors had always relied on negative light/shadows for their sculptures (P2, S6), and he sought out a way to rely on positive light (P3, S1). However, there's no indication that others had tried to do this before Noguchi. In fact, that goes against the author's key contention that Noguchi was an innovator who dealt with "deeply original questions" (P1, S1). Moreover, the passage states that Noguchi attempted to create a sculpture that relies on positive light in the U.S. (P3, S2).

  2. B
    Noguchi's scientific approach to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes on the author's argument?

    No. Neither the main point nor our notes discuss Noguchi's scientific training. Therefore, we should curb any desire to check the passage, eliminate or table (B), and check the next answer choice.

    But if we had to review the passage, we wouldn't find any support for (B).

    The author says that Noguchi's mind might have led him to become a scientist, but he became an artist instead (P1, S2). That doesn't mean he had no formal scientific training, however — maybe he took some science classes!

  3. C
    Despite the fact that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes on the author's argument?

    No. Neither the main point nor our notes suggest that the author thinks Fuller played a more important role in Noguchi's development. Moreover, the note for the second paragraph says that Noguchi realized the importance of negative light in sculpture while he worked as "Brancusi's stonecutter." If anything, that suggests that Brancusi probably played the more important role. For this reason, we can safely eliminate (C) without checking the passage.

    But if we had to review the passage, we'd see that Noguchi didn't even know Fuller when he made this realization. According to the passage, Noguchi made this realization while working in Paris with Brancusi in 1927 (P2, S2, S5-S6). Noguchi didn't meet Fuller until 1929 (P3, S2), so Fuller couldn't have possibly played a more important role in Noguchi's realization.

  4. D
    Noguchi was more interested Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem

    (D) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes on the author's argument?

    Yes. This answer lines up with the author's main point — that Noguchi was an innovator who continued to ask deeply original questions and evolve. Moreover, the fifth paragraph note says that Noguchi was willing to "move[] on" even after receiving praise for one artistic style. Therefore, we can review the passage to confirm that the author would agree with this statement.

    Upon review, we'll see that, in the first paragraph, the author says that Noguchi asked deeply original questions (P1, S1) and "repeatedly veered off" the conventional path (P1, S2). The author ends the passage by saying that he went on to the "next phase of his evolution" after his Fuller sculpture (P5, S2). So, the author would definitely agree with this statement. We can select (D) and advance to the following question.

  5. E
    Noguchi's work is of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Is this consistent with the main point or reflected in our notes on the author's argument?

    No. Neither the main point nor our notes bring up "aesthetic approaches to scientific inquiry." This passage is about an artist — not a scientist — so a discussion of scientific inquiry would be an odd and note-worthy digression. Therefore, we should curb any desire to check the passage, eliminate or table (E), and circle back to any answer choice we haven't already eliminated.

    But if we had to review the passage, we'd see that the author praises how Noguchi applies his scientific mind to the arts (P1, S2; P2, S6). But the author never says that Noguchi or anyone else applies their artistic mind to science, as this answer choice states.

What this tests

Discussion

  • help 4 replies

    Started by chriscole

View all discussions Start a discussion