<p>I have the following questions. </p>
<p>Passage 1</p>
<p>When I entered journalism school in the 1920s, I
found out that perennial and fundamental laws governing
the art of good writing had been discovered. Experts
had stubbornly and rigorously analyzed readers modest
capacity to dedicate their attention to the printed page
and had established once and for all, apparently with the
mathematical precision of astronomers, the order of
readers natural preferences. They found that effective
prose was composed of a limited number of very simple
(line 10) and common words grouped in short, crisp sentences.
When designed rigorously, such prose could penetrate the
opaque barrier of millions of readers indifference, apathy,
inattention, and obtuseness.</p>
<p>Passage 2
Beginning writers are often taught that effective prose
(line15) is crisp and concise and that most readers have no patience
with densely complex sentences and obscure vocabulary.
While clarity and succinctness are certainly worthy goals,
I sometimes worry that our assumption that the reading
public can comprehend only such writing might be selling
(line20) them short. Assuming that readers are merely able to digest
simple words, and that they have no interest in puzzling
through more challenging prose, turns that theory into a
self-fulfilling prophecy. Its our responsibility as writers
to offer the public something beyond workmanlike writing:
(line25) if we dont, readers will never appreciate writing as an art
rather than as a mechanical craft.</p>
<p>In comparison to Passage 2, the tone of Passage 1
is more
(A) earnest
(B) inspirational
(C) complacent
(D) defensive
(E) sarcastic</p>
<p>Why is it E? what are the words that make the author sound sarcastic?</p>
<p>The question that comes first to my mind is this: What
would it mean to say that an animal has the right to the
pursuit of happiness? How would that come about, and in
relationship to whom?
In speaking 5 of animal happiness, we often tend to
mean something like creature comforts. The emblems of
this are the golden retriever rolling in the grass, the horse
with his nose deep in the oats, kitty by the fire. Creature
comforts are important to animals: Grub first, then ethics
(line 10) is a motto that would describe many a wise Labrador
retriever, and I have a bull terrier named Annie whose
continual quest for the perfect pillow inspires her to
awesome feats. But there is something more to animals,
something more to my Annie, a capacity for satisfactions
(line15) that come from work in the full sensesomething
approximately like what leads some people to insist that
they need a career (though my own temperament is such
that I think of a good woodcarver or a dancer or a poet
sooner than I think of a business executive when I
(line 20) contemplate the kind of happiness enjoyed by an
accomplished dressage1 horse). This happiness, like the
artists, must come from something within the animal,
something trainers call talent, and so cannot be imposed
on the animal. But at the same time it does not arise in a
(line25) vacuum; if it had not been a fairly ordinary thing in one
part of the world at one point to teach young children to
play the harpsichord, it is doubtful that Mozarts music
would exist. There are animal versions, if not equivalents,
of Mozart, and they cannot make their spontaneous
(line30) passions into sustained happiness without education, any
more than Mozart could have.</p>
<p>Aristotle identified happiness with ethics and with work,
unlike Thomas Jefferson, who defined happiness as
Indolence of Body; Tranquility of Mind, and thus what I
(line35) call creature comforts. Aristotle also excluded as unethical
anything that animals and artists do, for reasons that look
wholly benighted to me. Nonetheless, his central insights
are more helpful than anything else I know in beginning
to understand why some horses and dogs can only be
(line40) described as competent, good at what they do, and therefore
happy. Not happy because leading lives of pleasure,
but rather happy because leading lives in which the sensation
of getting it right, the click, as of the pleasure that
comes from solving a puzzle or surmounting something,
(line45) is a governing principle.</p>
<p>Which of the following statements is most consistent
with the authors discussion of temperament in
lines 17-21?
(A) The author believes a poet can be successful in
business.
(B) The author considers artistic pursuits to be the
most personally fulfilling of all endeavors.
(C) The author suspects that a busy life can have its
own rewards.
(D) The author believes that few people are ever
satisfied with the jobs they have chosen.
(E) The author considers subjectivity and selfknowledge
to be critical to human gratification.</p>
<p>Why is B the answer? the point here in the paragraph is the happiness is from something within. </p>
<p>Which situation most accurately illustrates the authors
definition of a happy animal?
(A) A bird finding its one lifetime mate
(B) A dog herding sheep into a pen
(C) A horse being carefully groomed for a show
(D) A monkey escaping from a city zoo
(E) A cat caring devotedly for her kittens</p>
<p>I narrowed it down to A and E based on the passage's point that animal's happiness comes from satisfaction. When I realized the correct ans is B, I looked back and gathered "satisfaction... that come from work in the full sense.." and "happiness with ethics n work". Is this the reason for B?</p>