GMAT Section 3: Verbal Ability GMAT SECTION 3: VERBAL ABILITY Dumps in PDF

Art is visible. However, everything one sees is filtered through certain conditions, some of them historical, and others, natural. The historical conditions include the material, which is used — oil, colors, and the canvas; second, a certain style, i.e., a system of rules by which things visible are submitted a priori. There can be a general style, for example, the style of Impressionism, or a particular style, for example, the individual ways in which two painters, both impressionists, paint. The natural conditions include certain unchanging psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions.
The conditions of art are nothing but a particular way of interpreting reality. To understand this, one can examine the difference between the classical Greek and the classical Egyptian styles. For the Greeks, the reality of the visible was given by the perspective and the situation in which the object appears; for that reason, they presented a person in his individual movements. For the Egyptians, however, this was only the appearance of a transitory moment, which, according to their beliefs, was not real. Therefore, the Egyptians searched for the permanent essence and the typical character in their depiction of an object. For the Egyptians, Greek art was an illusion; for the Greeks, on the other hand, Egyptian art was unrealistic constructivism.
The way in which reality appears in art must not be regarded on its own. It is affected by many other systems of recognizing reality, including the political, religious, economic, intellectual, and social — in short, all the phenomena of human life. Moreover, art is always of a certain epoch, with its particular conception of reality.
Thus, when discussing, for example, the art of ancient myth, of medieval Christianity, or that of the technological age, one must be aware that myth, Christianity, or technology was the most salient feature of the epoch.
It is paradoxical to understand art as some kind of copy of the fields of experience connected with it. So, for example, it is meaningless for the work of art as such if one compares the landscape of a painting with the landscape, which served the artist as his model. Even if the artist had tried to make what he painted as similar as possible to the model he used, the landscape which he saw is only the matter from which something completely different emerges since he has submitted its view to the a priori conditions of art: namely to the material used (colors, canvas, etc.), to his style, and even to the fact that he paints on a flat surface. Thus one must contemplate a work of art by itself. Even if it is connected to other fields of experience it nevertheless displays something unique which appears in that piece of art and there alone.

According to the passage, classical Egyptians did not present a person in his individual movements

Art is visible. However, everything one sees is filtered through certain conditions, some of them historical, and others, natural. The historical conditions include the material, which is used — oil, colors, and the canvas; second, a certain style, i.e., a system of rules by which things visible are submitted a priori. There can be a general style, for example, the style of Impressionism, or a particular style, for example, the individual ways in which two painters, both impressionists, paint. The natural conditions include certain unchanging psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions.
The conditions of art are nothing but a particular way of interpreting reality. To understand this, one can examine the difference between the classical Greek and the classical Egyptian styles. For the Greeks, the reality of the visible was given by the perspective and the situation in which the object appears; for that reason, they presented a person in his individual movements. For the Egyptians, however, this was only the appearance of a transitory moment, which, according to their beliefs, was not real. Therefore, the Egyptians searched for the permanent essence and the typical character in their depiction of an object. For the Egyptians, Greek art was an illusion; for the Greeks, on the other hand, Egyptian art was unrealistic constructivism.
The way in which reality appears in art must not be regarded on its own. It is affected by many other systems of recognizing reality, including the political, religious, economic, intellectual, and social — in short, all the phenomena of human life. Moreover, art is always of a certain epoch, with its particular conception of reality.
Thus, when discussing, for example, the art of ancient myth, of medieval Christianity, or that of the technological age, one must be aware that myth, Christianity, or technology was the most salient feature of the epoch.
It is paradoxical to understand art as some kind of copy of the fields of experience connected with it. So, for example, it is meaningless for the work of art as such if one compares the landscape of a painting with the landscape, which served the artist as his model. Even if the artist had tried to make what he painted as similar as possible to the model he used, the landscape which he saw is only the matter from which something completely different emerges since he has submitted its view to the a priori conditions of art: namely to the material used (colors, canvas, etc.), to his style, and even to the fact that he paints on a flat surface. Thus one must contemplate a work of art by itself. Even if it is connected to other fields of experience it nevertheless displays something unique which appears in that piece of art and there alone.

The author mentions which of the following as one of the conditions through which art is seen?

Art is visible. However, everything one sees is filtered through certain conditions, some of them historical, and others, natural. The historical conditions include the material, which is used — oil, colors, and the canvas; second, a certain style, i.e., a system of rules by which things visible are submitted a priori. There can be a general style, for example, the style of Impressionism, or a particular style, for example, the individual ways in which two painters, both impressionists, paint. The natural conditions include certain unchanging psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions.
The conditions of art are nothing but a particular way of interpreting reality. To understand this, one can examine the difference between the classical Greek and the classical Egyptian styles. For the Greeks, the reality of the visible was given by the perspective and the situation in which the object appears; for that reason, they presented a person in his individual movements. For the Egyptians, however, this was only the appearance of a transitory moment, which, according to their beliefs, was not real. Therefore, the Egyptians searched for the permanent essence and the typical character in their depiction of an object. For the Egyptians, Greek art was an illusion; for the Greeks, on the other hand, Egyptian art was unrealistic constructivism.
The way in which reality appears in art must not be regarded on its own. It is affected by many other systems of recognizing reality, including the political, religious, economic, intellectual, and social — in short, all the phenomena of human life. Moreover, art is always of a certain epoch, with its particular conception of reality.
Thus, when discussing, for example, the art of ancient myth, of medieval Christianity, or that of the technological age, one must be aware that myth, Christianity, or technology was the most salient feature of the epoch.
It is paradoxical to understand art as some kind of copy of the fields of experience connected with it. So, for example, it is meaningless for the work of art as such if one compares the landscape of a painting with the landscape, which served the artist as his model. Even if the artist had tried to make what he painted as similar as possible to the model he used, the landscape which he saw is only the matter from which something completely different emerges since he has submitted its view to the a priori conditions of art: namely to the material used (colors, canvas, etc.), to his style, and even to the fact that he paints on a flat surface. Thus one must contemplate a work of art by itself. Even if it is connected to other fields of experience it nevertheless displays something unique which appears in that piece of art and there alone.

By asserting that art is filtered through certain conditions (line???), the author suggests which of the following?

Art is visible. However, everything one sees is filtered through certain conditions, some of them historical, and others, natural. The historical conditions include the material, which is used — oil, colors, and the canvas; second, a certain style, i.e., a system of rules by which things visible are submitted a priori. There can be a general style, for example, the style of Impressionism, or a particular style, for example, the individual ways in which two painters, both impressionists, paint. The natural conditions include certain unchanging psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions.
The conditions of art are nothing but a particular way of interpreting reality. To understand this, one can examine the difference between the classical Greek and the classical Egyptian styles. For the Greeks, the reality of the visible was given by the perspective and the situation in which the object appears; for that reason, they presented a person in his individual movements. For the Egyptians, however, this was only the appearance of a transitory moment, which, according to their beliefs, was not real. Therefore, the Egyptians searched for the permanent essence and the typical character in their depiction of an object. For the Egyptians, Greek art was an illusion; for the Greeks, on the other hand, Egyptian art was unrealistic constructivism.
The way in which reality appears in art must not be regarded on its own. It is affected by many other systems of recognizing reality, including the political, religious, economic, intellectual, and social — in short, all the phenomena of human life. Moreover, art is always of a certain epoch, with its particular conception of reality.
Thus, when discussing, for example, the art of ancient myth, of medieval Christianity, or that of the technological age, one must be aware that myth, Christianity, or technology was the most salient feature of the epoch.
It is paradoxical to understand art as some kind of copy of the fields of experience connected with it. So, for example, it is meaningless for the work of art as such if one compares the landscape of a painting with the landscape, which served the artist as his model. Even if the artist had tried to make what he painted as similar as possible to the model he used, the landscape which he saw is only the matter from which something completely different emerges since he has submitted its view to the a priori conditions of art: namely to the material used (colors, canvas, etc.), to his style, and even to the fact that he paints on a flat surface. Thus one must contemplate a work of art by itself. Even if it is connected to other fields of experience it nevertheless displays something unique which appears in that piece of art and there alone.

The author cites the example of psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions in order to illustrate

For a generation of suppressed, restless, working-class youths living in 1960 Jamaica, ska was a medium through which they could find expression. Since its original appearance, ska has resurfaced twice, each time presenting itself in a different guise to a new generation of music aficionados. Overcoming its humble beginnings, it has become one of the twentieth century’s most enduring and influential styles of music.
Since the early 1940's, Jamaica had adopted and adapted many forms of American musical styles. The predominantly black inhabitants of Jamaica took a liking to rhythm and blues music, importing a considerable number of American records that were showcased at dance halls in the early 1960s. Jamaican musicians took up the elements of rhythm and blues and combined it with traditional Jamaican mento music. The result was the first wave of ska. Musically, ska is a shuffle rhythm similar to mento but with even closer ties to rhythm and blues, placing the accent on the second and fourth beats, often moving in a 12-bar blues frame. The after beat, played on the piano or strummed by a rhythm guitar, came to be characteristic of the form. A horn section, usually consisting of trumpets, trombones, and saxophones, was a vital element. Classic bands, such as the Wailers wrote songs written about Trench Town (a ghetto), rude boys (street thugs), romance, and even religious themes. In 1965, ska began to take a backseat to a newly evolved type of music, called rock steady, which was more dependent than ska had been on rhythm provided by the bass guitar and drums.

Ska was later exported by traveling Jamaican artists to Great Britain, where it became known as "blue beat." By the mid 1970's, early British punk bands were infusing reggae, a style of music that came from rock steady, into their music. Near the end of the decade, however, there was a resurgence of the influence of ska because of its upbeat, danceable rhythm. This faster paced ska came to be known as two tone. One of the essential messages of two-tone ska was the promotion of racial harmony and of having fun in the face of subjugation.

The third wave of ska began in America around 1990. Bands influenced by the two-tone ska scene began to use punk and metal music to a greater extent. The combination, which is much faster than two tone, sounds very different from the original Jamaican brand of ska.
In its three different waves, ska has given voice to seemingly voiceless, downtrodden generations. Each time it resurfaces, a new message is taken up; however, the old messages are never forgotten

The primary purpose of this passage is to