SUPERIOR

D: No. This language is too extreme, and is highly unlikely to show up in a correct answer to an MCAT question.

6. A

A: Yes. You can infer this answer from the remarks about “passing” in paragraph 2.

B: No. This choice is too extreme. The author never indicates that the majority has no opinion about or reaction to attempts by minority members to “pass.”

C: No. The only positive aspect of minority experience is that which comes from group solidarity, not from any interaction with the majority. This choice takes lines in the last paragraph out of context.

D: No. This goes beyond the information given in the passage. The author does not suggest that those who attempt to “pass” are less able to participate in majority culture.

02b MCAT Verbal Wkbk Prac P.indd135 135 7/20/09 2:37:03 PM

136

|

© The Princeton Review, Inc.

Passage 27

1. C

A: No. The correct response will be inconsistent with the belief that modern cacti evolved from Pereskias, which may have evolved from ancient roses (paragraph 1). The commonality or lack thereof between modern Pereskias and cacti tells us nothing about their evolutionary connec-tion.

B: No. Cacti evolved around 20,000 years ago according to the passage (paragraph 1). Therefore, this choice creates no problems for the belief that cacti evolved from roses through Pereskias.

C: Yes. If no botanical migration is possible between the West Indies and the U.S., then the idea that West Indian roses gave rise to North American cacti (paragraph 1) would be sig-nificantly weakened.

D: No. While this might cast doubt on the speculation that cacti first arose about 20,000 years ago (paragraph 1), the evolutionary connection suggested by the author from roses to Pereskias and so to cacti does not depend on the accuracy of that speculation.

2. D

A: No. The plant cannot be a cactus, as cactus fruit is never poisonous.

B: No. Cactus fruit is never poisonous.

C: No. If the fruit is poisonous, it cannot be cactus fruit.

D: Yes. Cactus fruit is never poisonous (paragraph 4); thus the plant cannot be a cactus.

3. B

A: No. Heat is one problem for cacti (paragraph 3), but the author indicates that lack of water is a more serious problem (paragraph 2).

B: Yes. Scarcity of water is, according to the passage, the major problem confronted by cacti (paragraph 2).

C: No. Both heat and searing light or radiation are obstacles to be overcome (paragraph 3), yet they are not the greatest obstacles (paragraph 2).

D: No. The author specifies scarcity of water as the major problem or obstacle confronted by cacti (paragraph 2).

4. B

A: No. The last sentence of the passage states that more cacti in captivity have been killed by insufficiently severe circumstances than by anything else. Difficulty in duplicating high light intensity is not the same as widespread inability to do so. This choice is too weak.

B: Yes. The passage indicates that cacti need an approximation of a hot desert environment to survive, and that temperatures of under 70°F are not typical in the desert. If amateur botanists often attempt to grow cacti in overly cool temperatures, this would support the author’s claim that cultivated cacti are often killed by excessively mild conditions.

C: No. The highest temperature mentioned in the passage is 75°F.

D: No. This choice doesn’t go far enough. To support the author’s contention, it would have to

say that botanists water cacti beyond their ability to absorb.

© The Princeton Review, Inc.

|

¹³⁷

5. D

A: No. No correlation between high temperature and the drying up of fruit is suggested by the passage. Be careful not to use “common sense” to choose an answer.

B: No. The storage of water (paragraph 2) is not connected by the author to the formation of fleshy fruit (paragraph 4).

C: No. The author gives no evidence that animals in general prefer sweet to sour.

D: Yes. The author states that a cactus may lose its spines at the time at which the fruit may be snapped up by animals, and its seeds scattered (paragraph 4). The author also states that the fruit is not poisonous, and describes how the cactus has evolved in a variety of ways in order to adapt and survive. All of these claims give further evidence that the author would agree that the spines may fall off so that animals can more easily eat the fruit and so scatter the seeds, contributing to the survival of the (cactus) species.

6. D

A: No. The author does not indicate how widespread this belief is among rose enthusiasts.

B: No. The author neither accepts nor rejects this claim; the passage simply describes it (para-graph 1).

C: No. The passage states that “it is quite often assumed” to be true (paragraph 1).

D: Yes. The author mentions the claim but neither proves nor disproves it; it is simply de-scribed (paragraph 1).

Passage 28

1. B

A: No. The author mentions Arnheim in paragraph 1 as a spokesman for the theory of expres-sionism, but the passage as a whole is a discussion of Kracauer.

B: Yes. The passage first mentions various theoretical approaches (paragraph 1) as context for its discussion of Kracauer and his ideas (paragraphs 2–4). In the final paragraph, the author criticizes Kracauer’s perception of how audiences respond to “nonrealistic” movies.

C: No. There is no discussion of to what extent general artistic theories apply specifically to film—the only theories mentioned or described are particular to cinema.

D: No. This choice is too narrow. Beware of primary purpose answer choices that capture the main idea of a single paragraph (here, the final paragraph) rather than the purpose of the entire passage.

2. C

Note: Kracauer argued that film should (and for the most part does) record the “visible world around us”

with minimum interference by or creative presence of the artist (paragraphs 2 and 3).

A: No. Kracauer would reject the validity of a director “interfering” with reality by using angles in order to communicate some message or comment.

B: No. Kracauer believes film should “leave the raw materials of reality more or less intact” (para-graph 2), not pick and choose among them.

C: Yes. Kracauer’s Realism posits that film should record external reality in its natural and unmanipulated state (paragraphs 2 and 3).

D: No. Kracauer believes film is like photography in that it leaves “the raw materials of reality more or less intact” (paragraph 2).

02b MCAT Verbal Wkbk Prac P.indd137 137 7/20/09 2:37:04 PM

138

|

© The Princeton Review, Inc.

3. D

A: No. Refusal of a Realist filmmaker to manipulate his or her subject in order to make an ideo-logical point would be entirely consistent with the author’s depiction of Realism (paragraph 3).

B: No. “Formative tendency” refers to cinematic technique that distorts or manipulates reality.

Expressionistic films do exhibit such tendencies (paragraph 3). Thus this statement is consis-tent, not inconsistent with the author’s description of Expressionism.

C: No. There is no reason based in the passage to believe that a truly realistic film director cannot draw on foreign literary sources. Thus this does not contradict the author’s depiction of Kra-cauer or of the Realist school.

D: Yes. Kracauer, who the author describes as an exemplar of Realist theory (paragraph 2), praises the use of natural lighting that does not distort reality (paragraph 3). Therefore, a neorealist film that uses artificial lighting in order to eliminate an aspect of reality would be inconsistent with the author’s depiction of realism.

4. A

A: Yes. The author criticizes Kracauer for underestimating “the flexibility of an audience’s re- sponse to nonrealistic movies” (paragraph 5). This, and the rest of the final paragraph, sug-gests that Kracauer (falsely) believes that only “documentary” style films will be perceived as “real” by audiences. Thus, Kracauer likely believed that a supposed inability of audiences to respond to depictions of historical or fantastical scenes as if they were real necessitated his “photographic” approach to filmmaking.

B: No. Arnheim is described as a spokesperson for Expressionism, which is described (along with Realism) as centered on the work of art (paragraph 1).

C: No. This choice is too extreme. The author writes that most, not all, Realist theories took a documentary approach (paragraph 2).

D: No. Kracauer admits that expressionistic movies exist (paragraph 2). However, the author describes him as fundamentally hostile to the expressionist aesthetic (paragraphs 2 and 3).

5. C

A: No. Kracauer is presented as highly partisan. For example he is hostile towards expressionistic movies (paragraphs 2 and 3), he rejects propagandistic films (paragraph 3), and he refuses to accept adaptation of most literary or dramatic sources (paragraph 4). There is no hint of recon-ciliation or compromise here.

B: No. Kracauer not only argues that film should be realistic, he claims that it largely is realistic

(paragraph 2). Thus expressionistic movies that do not “leave the raw materials of reality more

In document TrabajoFin de Grado 1. PLANOS (página 42-200)