Law School Discussion

POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension

Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #20 on: December 03, 2005, 12:22:24 PM »
If every author that wrote about anything tacitly approved of it, that's a big jump to make... certainly people write things about which they are unbiased (one meaning of indifferent), and do not take a side. In fact, lots of people write about things with which they disagree, so that logic of "she wrote about it, she must like it/agree with it" doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
Also, it was obvious and cumbersome how many times the author bothered to say, "Gluck said", "according to Gluck" etc., even compared with the other passages in that RC section. She went out of her way to demonstrate that she wasn't speaking for herself in her conclusions, but just relaying a view of Gluck's work.

Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #21 on: December 03, 2005, 12:24:29 PM »
Agreed. You are winning me back, Zen. I combeed through the passage carefully to find some indication of acceptance...and came up with nothing.

Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #22 on: December 03, 2005, 12:25:21 PM »
Yes, but the author seems to discount Gluck's critics and talk more about the positive aspects of Glucks poetry than the things wrong with it.  "Detached indifference" seems like something only possible in scientific writing.

Rooster

  • ****
  • 496
  • This dog has a tough life.
    • View Profile
Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #23 on: December 03, 2005, 12:25:29 PM »
If every author that wrote about anything tacitly approved of it, that's a big jump to make... certainly people write things about which they are unbiased (one meaning of indifferent), and do not take a side. In fact, lots of people write about things with which they disagree, so that logic of "she wrote about it, she must like it/agree with it" doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
Also, it was obvious and cumbersome how many times the author bothered to say, "Gluck said", "according to Gluck" etc., even compared with the other passages in that RC section. She went out of her way to demonstrate that she wasn't speaking for herself in her conclusions, but just relaying a view of Gluck's work.

I think if she didnt approve she wouldnt have written about it without agruing against it

Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #24 on: December 03, 2005, 12:27:06 PM »
But you don't have to be FOR or AGAINST something, you can just write about it. And, I think the biggest thing is that literally every single sentence in that damn passage referred consciously to the fact that "GLUCK said/did/thought/whatever" and that's an annoying way to write, and not the way any of the other RC passages were, unless the author is deliberately trying to be impartial.

Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #25 on: December 03, 2005, 12:28:26 PM »
are you implying that impartial is the same as "detached indifference"

Terabithia

  • ****
  • 711
  • Wondering and Wishing
    • View Profile
Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #26 on: December 03, 2005, 12:29:16 PM »
I went with tacit acceptance.

Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #27 on: December 03, 2005, 12:30:06 PM »
If you look up "indifference" one of the possible meanings is "impartiality" and detached reflects the annoying way that she was constantly referring everything back to Gluck, and not taking any of her statements on for herself.

Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #28 on: December 03, 2005, 12:31:48 PM »
For the Glück question, I picked tacit approval.  Here's why.

"Tacit" means silent.  It's similar to "implicit."  The fact that the author didn't take a stand in support of Glück doesn't mean the author didn't agree with her.  Rather, the author presented Glück's stance without criticism, using Glück's words to rebut her critics.  Additionally, the last paragraph was entirely Glück's opinions, without anything about her detractors.  I thought that meant that the author had a tone of tacit approval, certainly not detached indifference.

Re: POST-MORTEM December '05 - Reading Comprehension
« Reply #29 on: December 03, 2005, 12:33:42 PM »
I dunno, maybe you're right, its the combination of "detached" and "indifference" that is hard to swallow though.  The first paragraph seemed pretty indicative that the author approved of the way Gluck writes, simply by implying that most feminine authors ignore past writers while Gluck appreciates them.