<p>But yeah what’s funny to me is that I feel the exact opposite. I think analyze a misconception was a trap answer, like one you would pick of you only read like the first paragraph. Countingkg put it pretty eloquently, it does not even begin to reach the level of analysis at all. The intro and conclusion relate running and writing, sure, but that does nothing to address any misconceptions. Rather, it describes writing by comparing it to running. The questions at the end of the passage don’t serve to analyze the misconception, there was even a question asking what their purpose was, and I believe it something along the lines of “describing things running and writing have in common”. It is not in dispute that the author feels similarly about running and writing. What is in dispute is whether the primary purpose of this comparison is to dispel any misconception. The statement about most people being deceived by the surface reality was a brief aside utilized point out how difficult writing is. He further pointed this out with the metaphor etc. I mean, look at the first sentence of the passage: “Writing novels, to me, is basically a kind of manual labor”. THIS is what the author was trying to convey. He wasn’t attacking or disputing any misconception. He was simply describing the difficulties and processes of writing, nothing more, nothing less. If his primary purpose was to address a misconception, he would’ve pointed out the misconception in the very first sentence and ran with it throughout the rest of the passage. Instead, he briefly mentions it for 1-2 sentences before moving on to more figurative descriptions of writing.</p>
<p>To Peezus: Once again, I think you are mistaken in assuming that descriptions of activities have to take mundane, pointless forms. Descriptions in general can be incredibly moving, persuasive, profound, etc. No one is saying or even implying that he’s only writing because it’s fun, or that he has no purpose. He is conveying the difficulty and processes that go into finding your own talent as a writer through metaphor and analogy. This certainly falls under the umbrella of description.</p>
<p>Lets just agree to disagree. I was gonna type out a really long winded response, analyzing your misconception (zing), but it’s really not worth it. Our answers are submitted. This one question will hardly effect my score or your score. I think the same points on both sides are just going to get rehashed and a lot of time will be wasted. I respect your answer choice and reasoning, but I’m sticking with mine. Peace man</p>
<p>Fair enough, Peezus. Best of luck with your score.</p>
<p>@ThePariah I remember one option was tenaciousness, and I only remember that one because I was debating between that audacity but ended up picking audacity.</p>
<p>Secondary concern and ethical implication were separate questions. I don’t remember any other choices for secondary concern. The only other choice I remember for ethical implication is something like “elaborating on an argument brought up in Passage 1”, as that is probably the second most common answer people on CC have.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure the answer choice to the one about the Japanese novelist wasn’t “describing and activity” but rather “reflecting on an activity”. Not sure if that helps or not but I think that the passage as a whole was definitely talking about him reflecting on writing itself and what it means to him.</p>
<p>I don’t see how it can be “analyze a misconception”. He was using personal anecdotes and analogies to explain what writing meant to him. In addition, he was describing how other writers achieve personal success, based on their individual levels of skill, age etc.</p>
<p>Would somebody who selected “analyze a misconception” state what the misconception was? Was it that writing is easy? Difficult? </p>
<p>@immasenior
The misconception was that writing was not physically challenging. The debate is whether or not the primary purpose of the passage was to analyze this misconception or to describe an activity. There is no debating that a misconception was mentioned in the passage. It seems that we have moved past this topic though. Both answers seem possible to me.</p>
<p>biribiri and immasenior are right. I don’t get why this answer is so heavily contested. Same thing with the “unequivocal endorsement vs. legal position” thing. Some of these answers are just so obvious I don’t understand why people have to write dissertations to convince people lol. </p>
<p>I answered in favor of “… activity”. Since there seems to be a non-consensus over the first word of that answer, I will leave it unnamed. But, I am leaning towards “reflecting on an activity”, as I believe that was the correct wording. </p>
<p>Yeah, my feeling is that it really was not analyzed throughout the passage, but we can agree to disagree: I actually just realized that I didn’t get that other question wrong, so I only have one potential wrong answer in CR. Yay! Unless I bombed the essay (which I don’t think I did), hopefully a 2400! </p>
<p>Here’s hoping for the best for everyone here. </p>
<p>The ■■■■■ on the google doc right now… :)) Neither the ETS nor CollegeBoard would bother “tracking” anyone down. I highly doubt they care that much.</p>
<p>@countingkg Thanks, and best of luck to you as well. I’m holding out for at least a 2200, (Math probably screwed me over; likely a 680) but I’ll be able to live with a 2100.</p>