<p>
[quote]
i would say adversarial:</p>
<p>art fights against society to preserve its freedom from cultural norms
society fights against art to ensure that change doesn't happen
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's what I put, and I have similar justification. I think I agree and am slightly more confident now . . .</p>
<p>if the fire alarm went off (or was pulled) can they void all the scores?</p>
<p>yeah i got 1/16...nice</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't really see society as fighting against art. They buy art, just not the kind that promotes individualism.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In the passage, the relationship was described as a lot more severe. I think at one point they literally used the word 'fight' to describe feelings about individualism.</p>
<p>i think that adversial is to extreme</p>
<p>i think i put adversarial also - no one was "exploiting" anything... the people were not taking advantage of arts or anything, they were just trying to "control" it (that's kind of a bit over-kill, but you know what I'm saying)... there are conflicts between art and popular society. If the people were trying to "exploit" the art, where is the proof? Where/how did they succeed?</p>
<p>But in the first paragraph the narrator talks about artists who give in to the pressure and produce art that the public wants. Are they adverserial? Although I think that both would work, that example just tipped the scales for me.</p>
<p>ADJECTIVE: </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 was to be exploit...</p>
<p>murasaki- I just saw your earlier comment about the adversarial thing. I agree.</p>
<p>i think i got 5 e's for the ably section</p>
<p>
[quote]
ADJECTIVE:</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).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You'll notice that I used that exact same definition earlier in this thread. I believe individualism in true art was antagonistic to public creed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
i think that adversial is to extreme
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you look at the above def. you'll see that the only requirement for the adj. is that things be opposing, the degree of extremity varies, otherwise the def. would say 'extreme antagonism'.</p>
<p>For the one with ably, that one was no error??</p>
<p>Adversary: : one that contends with, opposes, or resists : (Webster.com)</p>
<p>The public and artists were clearly shown to have different needs/views. The artists wanted freedom of expression like that of scientists and philo.- the public wanted pleasing art work that wasn't radical. Thus the two aren't suited for each other- and there is opposition/ressistance. </p>
<p>trust me.</p>
<p>Pretty sure Truth Smoker- Princeton online dictionary says Ably is a word and aptly... just so happens to be a synonym. (I seriously hate that question.)</p>
<p>If anyone wants to chat- mastaofbrown (aim)</p>
<p>You've got my backing on that answer, but I'm biased by now with the exhaustive debate.</p>
<p>My problem with that question was the fact that the businessman were exchanging cards from side by side rickshaws. Is the from correct?</p>
<p>yeah, i marked that as correct.</p>
<p>now posted for the third time, a sentence comp:</p>
<p>Belying her reputation for parsimony, Dr. Someone ______ a particular local charity.</p>
<p>it was something like that. what was the answer?</p>
<p>Yeah- rickshaws are like small taxis in 3rd world countries usually Asia. So things were transfered FROM one place to another =p.</p>
<p>no its "BY" side to side</p>
<p>if there was a track team practicing outside my testing room, can nething b done to have that noted cuz that ****ed me off and the proctor said we couldnt do nething...</p>
<p>belying is misrepresenting, and parsimony is frugality. So the answer in the blank would have to be something generous.</p>
<p>Do you think that was an exp. section? I didn't have that section out of the 3 CR. Am I missing something?</p>