Official SAT II Literature thread

Shirobot
Sun, 09 Oct 2005 19:27:48 +0000

His rationalizing of his actions largely stems from his attitude toward the rich. The fact that it’s just him justifying what he did doesn’t make his attitude any less prevalent. As for inference VS. analysis, inference is most often associated with drawing a conclusion from subtext and tone, not with direct reading. When a text infers something, it usually hints at or implies it, not says it outright. I can definitely see your argument, but I still think my answer (and that of those who agreed with/I agreed with) is correct.

As for the other one, I don’t think it was sarcasm. Sarcasm (just like cynicism) implies contempt, which is simply not present.

“Charlotte’s place was by Arthur, who was sitting next to the fire with a degree of enjoyment which gave a good deal of merit to his civility in wishing her to take his chair.”

This does not say that Arthur was attempting to appear civil, and it wasn’t criticizing him for doing so, it merely states that his willingness to give up his enjoyment supports a case for his civility. His relief when she does not take the chair is not surprising, ironic, or cynical, it is simply what is to be expected given the fact that he was enjoying the seat.

Edit: Oh, and for the mother one, didn’t it say that it (the first sentence) was to emphasize the uniqueness of the events discussed in the rest of the passage (or something like that)? That’s what I remember reading, and the event he discussed afterwards was commonplace, and simply used as an example of the themes he was referring to.