<p>
[quote]
it was exploittaive not adversarial</p>
<p>for it tobe adversarial they would have to be enemies, agasint each other</p>
<p>while the public did show some disdain for art, art clearly has nothing agasitn the public</p>
<p>rather it was exploitative as public was restrciting art- controlling it- exploiting it for its own causes, to see what htey wanted to, the familiar, the usual, the norm... not creative thought</p>
<p>duh
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with your reasoning, I see it now, but don't say 'duh' as if CR questions have obvious answers. :) </p>
<p>But (I ask yet again) what was the sentence with the 'v' word in it?</p>
<p>tellallyourfriends: I got a 12 on the janurary essay</p>
<p>umm, so yeah today was a really uneven test:</p>
<p>On the janurary SAT, i thought the math was pretty basic (I got an 800), the writing was ok - i never really know how i do on those sections (I got a 790 - 12 on the essay and 2 multiple choice wrong), but the reading was awful (mid 600s).
Today, the math was much more difficult - I used up all the time allowed and actually had to do some "written work" for most of the problems...Although I can't think of one I'm positive I got wrong, there were a few that I spent a couple minutes on. The essay was really simple, straightforward, but the writing questions were kind of tough - I think I had like 3 no errors in a row in one part. The verbal, however, was much easier than the Janurary SAT. I know I messed up one fill-in, and I think one or two on a passage, but, other than that, I think I did alright - certainly better than the first take.</p>
<p>My test today: the chair problem, the weird square thing with the shaded area in the middle, the Zimbabwe letter, the Tim Cannon thing, the prism passage, the machine passage, appreciating art passage, umm, some graphs on the math, and the writing section with the "business decends" in it. </p>
<p>adversarial can also mean 'antagonistic elements'. Didn't the public hate/fight against the individualistic expression inherent in art? I'm very unsure now, do you have some general examples of statements from the passage that might exemplify an exploitive relationship between art and society? It'd really help if it mentioned something about perhaps the public using art, which I'm semi-sure it did, but I can't remember . . .</p>
<p>I think it's Adver. b/c the author somewhat represents the PoV of artists and intellectuals - and he says art is not to be created for the public's desires. The public constrains expression and the artists try to free themselves from this. Imo it's adver. (but I was leaning either way).</p>
<p>I think it's exploititave because adverserial implies a willingness of artists to somehow "destroy" the public, even though the passage clearly states they just want a change in attitude of the public.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think it's Adver. b/c the author somewhat represents the PoV of artists and intellectuals - and he says art is not to be created for the public's desires. The public constrains expression and the artists try to free themselves from this. Imo it's adver. (but I was leaning either way).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Could you explain that a little more? I put the same thing as you and want to be more confident, or I'll lose sleep over this one. :P</p>
<p>You keep doing 45-45-90's (SO TEDIOUS) until you get to the central square. Then, if you didn't mess up, you'd get an area of 1, and the total area was 16.</p>
<p>Adversarial doesn't necessarily mean super-arch-nemeses-wanna-kill-each-other.</p>
<p>Relating to or characteristic of an adversary; involving antagonistic elements: the chasm between management and labor in this country, an often needlessly adversarial... atmosphere (Steve Lohr).</p>
<p>It's possible that the definition was intended this way, IMO.</p>
<p>I doubt it though. The first paragraph was pretty straightforward that the public just wanted things that would please them, and the last paragraph said that the public wanted the end of individualism. In a simple phrase, the artist is the public's ***** (female dog).</p>
<p>
[quote]
I doubt it though. The first paragraph was pretty straightforward that the public just wanted things that would please them, and the last paragraph said that the public wanted the end of individualism. In a simple phrase, the artist is the public's ***** (female dog).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think it would be exploitative if the public succeeded in making an average artist it's (female dog), but in most instances, I don't think the public does. Was there an example that in the passage that said most of the time the artist willingly submitted? I can't remember, that would make the 'exploitative' arg a lot stronger. But with the part of the quote I bolded, it's saying the public wanted an end to individualism, a tenet of 'true artists'. Wouldn't this imply an opposition between the artist and the public?</p>
<p>Yes it would- I agree 100%. On another note... did you guys know Ably was a word? On one of the Find the Error questions in writing (close to the end- 14 questions long) there was a choice marked Ably (as In the Photographer ably captured the ... or something). I thought it meant Aptly and so I marked it wrong- turns out that ably is a word and I gues that makes the answer E. (DOH!)</p>