<p>Please explain BB Pg 592 #17</p>
<p>This is a tricky one. Process of elimination is a pretty good approach.</p>
<p>(A) is incorrect for a couple of reasons. The choreographer has no “need” as expressed in the passage, and there;s nothing in here about spectacular effects.</p>
<p>(B) talks about mathematical forms, and lines are certainly mathematical forms. The choreographer definitely used lines (see line 3-4)</p>
<p>(C) just because lines “rarely occur in nature”, that doesn’t mean the choreographer is estranged from nature.</p>
<p>(D) this just isn’t mentioned at all.</p>
<p>(E) lots of my students find this one tempting, but it’s too broad. First, the passage doesn’t say anything about multiple “geometric forms”…it talks about lines. (Direction is not a geometric form.) Second, “universality” is a pretty extreme word and needs to be clearly justified in the passage for it to be correct. It just isn’t…there’s nothing about universality here.</p>