Saul Hoffman's scientific journal paper published in 2015 in Societies explores the relationship between two topics that at the surface are very distant from each other. As he goes on to state, "It is relatively easy, at least for an economist, to see why economists would be attracted to issues like teen pregnancy and teen childbearing, despite their apparent distance from the core topics of economics. First, economics ?especially microeconomics ?is fundamentally the study of choices that individuals make, traditionally and most often in formal markets with monetary prices, but now more and more frequently outside that sphere. Viewed from that perspective, choices involving sexual and fertility behavior among teens are an incredibly challenging, but inviting, target. Is it possible to identify the role of economic incentives, including government policy, on these behaviors? Is it sensible to apply traditional models of rational choice decision-making to teens?
Second, the traditional concern about teen fertility was predicated on the notion that it was an economically catastrophic act. In a famous and oft-quoted 1968 article, Arthur Campbell wrote that 'The girl who has an illegitimate child at the age of 16 suddenly has 90 percent of her life's script written for her,' including reduced opportunities for schooling, the labor market, and marriage. But it doesn't take too much reflection to appreciate that more may be going on in leading to these poor outcomes than just a teen birth. Disentangling the causal effect of teen childbearing on subsequent socio-economic outcomes from its correlational effect is another deliciously inviting and challenging target, this time well-suited for the applied economist or econometrician.
Just to make all this yet more inviting, the two research strands are closely related. Suppose it could be demonstrated that for some teens the socio-economic impact of a teen birth was negligible. For example, maybe future prospects for some teens were equally poor with or without a birth or perhaps government programs provided substantial benefits, so that the net impact on socio-economic well-being was consequently small or even positive. Then, it might well be 'rational' in an economic sense to have a teen birth in the first place, thereby linking the research on the causal impact of a teen birth with the research on the choice determinants of a teen birth. So what came to be known as the teen birth `causes' literature and the teen birth `consequences' literature were clearly interrelated.
And then, to add yet another layer of challenge, the teen fertility rate in the U.S. has fallen at a rate that is totally unprecedented. Teen fertility was once widespread, with most of it occurring within early and sometimes not entirely voluntary marriage. In 1960, the teen fertility rate was approximately 90 births per 1000, which implied that more than 40% of women ever had a teen birth. When I published my first article on teen births 25 years ago, the teen fertility rate was 60 births per 1000, down one-third from 1960, but it had increased six years in a row in what turned out to be a deviation from the downward trend. Since then the rate has declined every single year, except for a short but puzzling uptick between 2005 and 2007. In 2014, the teen fertility rate was 24.2 births per 1000, the lowest teen fertility rate ever recorded in the U.S., though still shockingly high by European standards. Thus, the rate fell by more than 50% during my professional association with the topic and by 70% since 1960. Of course, at the same time teen marital births largely disappeared, falling from 85% of teen births to 12%.
This adds yet another focus for economic research. Why did the rate fall? Did it have anything to do with changes in the costs of teen childbearing or changes in policy? Is it a good thing or not?
In this article I try to make sense out of these various research strands by providing a personal narrative through the economics literature on teen childbearing, with a special emphasis on the three issues discussed above. My goal is to make the literature, including some reasonably technical content, accessible and valuable to a non-economist."
Hoffman, S. (2015). Teen Childbearing and Economics: A Short History of a 25-Year Research Love Affair. Societies, 5(3), 646-663. doi:10.3390/soc5030646
The author's main point could be most strongly undermined by a sociological or economic study showing that:
A. statistics on teen birth make little apparent sense because even when there is an overall downward trend, the teen birth rate can unpredictably swing upward, and vice versa.
B. many teens who give birth do so not out of desire to be parents, but because they lack access to birth control and effective sex education.
C. in recent years, the economic and career results of teen pregnancy have been getting worse.
D. potential teenage mothers are minimally influenced by economic considerations like career and financial prospects, but make choices based on irrational factors like community beliefs about morality.
Saul Hoffman's scientific journal paper published in 2015 in Societies explores the relationship between two topics that at the surface are very distant from each other. As he goes on to state, "It is relatively easy, at least for an economist, to see why economists would be attracted to issues like teen pregnancy and teen childbearing, despite their apparent distance from the core topics of economics. First, economics ?especially microeconomics ?is fundamentally the study of choices that individuals make, traditionally and most often in formal markets with monetary prices, but now more and more frequently outside that sphere. Viewed from that perspective, choices involving sexual and fertility behavior among teens are an incredibly challenging, but inviting, target. Is it possible to identify the role of economic incentives, including government policy, on these behaviors? Is it sensible to apply traditional models of rational choice decision-making to teens?
Second, the traditional concern about teen fertility was predicated on the notion that it was an economically catastrophic act. In a famous and oft-quoted 1968 article, Arthur Campbell wrote that 'The girl who has an illegitimate child at the age of 16 suddenly has 90 percent of her life's script written for her,' including reduced opportunities for schooling, the labor market, and marriage. But it doesn't take too much reflection to appreciate that more may be going on in leading to these poor outcomes than just a teen birth. Disentangling the causal effect of teen childbearing on subsequent socio-economic outcomes from its correlational effect is another deliciously inviting and challenging target, this time well-suited for the applied economist or econometrician.
Just to make all this yet more inviting, the two research strands are closely related. Suppose it could be demonstrated that for some teens the socio-economic impact of a teen birth was negligible. For example, maybe future prospects for some teens were equally poor with or without a birth or perhaps government programs provided substantial benefits, so that the net impact on socio-economic well-being was consequently small or even positive. Then, it might well be 'rational' in an economic sense to have a teen birth in the first place, thereby linking the research on the causal impact of a teen birth with the research on the choice determinants of a teen birth. So what came to be known as the teen birth `causes' literature and the teen birth `consequences' literature were clearly interrelated.
And then, to add yet another layer of challenge, the teen fertility rate in the U.S. has fallen at a rate that is totally unprecedented. Teen fertility was once widespread, with most of it occurring within early and sometimes not entirely voluntary marriage. In 1960, the teen fertility rate was approximately 90 births per 1000, which implied that more than 40% of women ever had a teen birth. When I published my first article on teen births 25 years ago, the teen fertility rate was 60 births per 1000, down one-third from 1960, but it had increased six years in a row in what turned out to be a deviation from the downward trend. Since then the rate has declined every single year, except for a short but puzzling uptick between 2005 and 2007. In 2014, the teen fertility rate was 24.2 births per 1000, the lowest teen fertility rate ever recorded in the U.S., though still shockingly high by European standards. Thus, the rate fell by more than 50% during my professional association with the topic and by 70% since 1960. Of course, at the same time teen marital births largely disappeared, falling from 85% of teen births to 12%.
This adds yet another focus for economic research. Why did the rate fall? Did it have anything to do with changes in the costs of teen childbearing or changes in policy? Is it a good thing or not?
In this article I try to make sense out of these various research strands by providing a personal narrative through the economics literature on teen childbearing, with a special emphasis on the three issues discussed above. My goal is to make the literature, including some reasonably technical content, accessible and valuable to a non-economist."
Hoffman, S. (2015). Teen Childbearing and Economics: A Short History of a 25-Year Research Love Affair. Societies, 5(3), 646-663. doi:10.3390/soc5030646
What does the author mean by the claim in paragraph 3 that "what came to be known as the teen birth 'causes' literature and the teen birth 'consequences' literature were clearly interrelated"?
A. The question of why teens give birth is closely related to the question of how having a child affects their future prospects.
B. The topic of teen birth has been overlooked, and so research on causes and consequences has been conducted by members of the same small research community.
C. Causes and consequences literature have suffered from the same mistake of assuming teen birth is more catastrophic than it actually is.
D. Researchers have created a false dichotomy between causes and effects, when actually researchers on these two topics are asking the same questions.
Saul Hoffman's scientific journal paper published in 2015 in Societies explores the relationship between two topics that at the surface are very distant from each other. As he goes on to state, "It is relatively easy, at least for an economist, to see why economists would be attracted to issues like teen pregnancy and teen childbearing, despite their apparent distance from the core topics of economics. First, economics ?especially microeconomics ?is fundamentally the study of choices that individuals make, traditionally and most often in formal markets with monetary prices, but now more and more frequently outside that sphere. Viewed from that perspective, choices involving sexual and fertility behavior among teens are an incredibly challenging, but inviting, target. Is it possible to identify the role of economic incentives, including government policy, on these behaviors? Is it sensible to apply traditional models of rational choice decision-making to teens?
Second, the traditional concern about teen fertility was predicated on the notion that it was an economically catastrophic act. In a famous and oft-quoted 1968 article, Arthur Campbell wrote that 'The girl who has an illegitimate child at the age of 16 suddenly has 90 percent of her life's script written for her,' including reduced opportunities for schooling, the labor market, and marriage. But it doesn't take too much reflection to appreciate that more may be going on in leading to these poor outcomes than just a teen birth. Disentangling the causal effect of teen childbearing on subsequent socio-economic outcomes from its correlational effect is another deliciously inviting and challenging target, this time well-suited for the applied economist or econometrician.
Just to make all this yet more inviting, the two research strands are closely related. Suppose it could be demonstrated that for some teens the socio-economic impact of a teen birth was negligible. For example, maybe future prospects for some teens were equally poor with or without a birth or perhaps government programs provided substantial benefits, so that the net impact on socio-economic well-being was consequently small or even positive. Then, it might well be 'rational' in an economic sense to have a teen birth in the first place, thereby linking the research on the causal impact of a teen birth with the research on the choice determinants of a teen birth. So what came to be known as the teen birth `causes' literature and the teen birth `consequences' literature were clearly interrelated.
And then, to add yet another layer of challenge, the teen fertility rate in the U.S. has fallen at a rate that is totally unprecedented. Teen fertility was once widespread, with most of it occurring within early and sometimes not entirely voluntary marriage. In 1960, the teen fertility rate was approximately 90 births per 1000, which implied that more than 40% of women ever had a teen birth. When I published my first article on teen births 25 years ago, the teen fertility rate was 60 births per 1000, down one-third from 1960, but it had increased six years in a row in what turned out to be a deviation from the downward trend. Since then the rate has declined every single year, except for a short but puzzling uptick between 2005 and 2007. In 2014, the teen fertility rate was 24.2 births per 1000, the lowest teen fertility rate ever recorded in the U.S., though still shockingly high by European standards. Thus, the rate fell by more than 50% during my professional association with the topic and by 70% since 1960. Of course, at the same time teen marital births largely disappeared, falling from 85% of teen births to 12%.
This adds yet another focus for economic research. Why did the rate fall? Did it have anything to do with changes in the costs of teen childbearing or changes in policy? Is it a good thing or not?
In this article I try to make sense out of these various research strands by providing a personal narrative through the economics literature on teen childbearing, with a special emphasis on the three issues discussed above. My goal is to make the literature, including some reasonably technical content, accessible and valuable to a non-economist."
Hoffman, S. (2015). Teen Childbearing and Economics: A Short History of a 25-Year Research Love Affair. Societies, 5(3), 646-663. doi:10.3390/soc5030646
What is the author's main purpose in writing this passage?
A. To demonstrate that the current downturn in teen births is surprising because the socioeconomic consequences of teen birth have become less severe
B. To elucidate the possible reasons for and against bearing a child as a teenager
C. To present the question of teen birth as a challenging and fascinating question for the economist
D. To critique the existing literature that falsely assumes giving birth as a teen is always a harmful act
Gauguin's attitude toward art marked a break from the past and a beginning to modern art. Like all Post- Impressionist artists, he passed through an Impressionist phase but became quickly dissatisfied with the limitations of the style, and went on to discover a new style that had the directness and universality of a symbol and that concentrated on impressions, ideas and experiences. The beginning of his modern tradition lay in his rejection of Impressionism. He considered naturalism an error to be avoided. He was preoccupied with suggestion rather than description, seeking to portray not the exterior, but the essence of things in their purest, simplest, and most primitive form, which could only be achieved through simplification of the form. He firmly believed throughout his life that "art is an abstraction" and that "this abstraction [must be derived] from nature while dreaming before it." One must think of the creation that will result rather than the model, and not try to render the model exactly as one sees it. This was the birth of "Synthetism" or rather Synthetist-Symbolic, as Gauguin referred to it, using the term "symbolic" to indicate that the forms and patterns in his pictures were meant to suggest mental images or ideas and not simply to record visual experience.
Symbolism flourished around the period of 1885 to 1910 and can be defined as the rejection of direct, literal representation in favor of evocation and suggestion. Painters tried to give a visual expression to emotional experiences, and therefore the movement was a reaction against the naturalistic aims of Impressionism. Satisfying the need for a more spiritual or emotional approach in art, Symbolism is characterized by the desire to seek refuge in a dreamworld of beauty and the belief that color and line in themselves could express ideas. Stylistically, the tendency was towards flattened forms and broad areas of color, and features of the movement were an intense religious feeling and an interest in subjects of death, disease, and sin.
Similarly, "Synthetism" involved the simplification of forms into large-scale patterns and the expressive purification of colors. Form and color had to be simplified for the sake of expression. This style reacted against the "formlessness" of Impressionism and favored painting subjectively and expressing one's ideas rather than relying on external objects as subject matters. It was characterized by areas of pure colors, very defined contours, an emphasis on pattern and decorative qualities, and a relative absence of shadows.
Gauguin's new art form merged these two movements and succeeded in freeing color, form, and line, bringing it to express the artists' emotions, sensibilities, and personal experiences of the world around them. His style created a break with the old tradition of descriptive naturalism and favored the synthesis of observation and imagination. Gauguin sustained that forms are not discovered in nature but in one's wild imagination, and it was in himself that he searched rather than in his surroundings. For this reason, he scorned the Impressionists for their lack of imagination and their mere scientific reasoning. Furthermore, Gauguin used color unnaturalistically for its decorative or emotional effect and reintroduced emphatic outlines. "Synthetism" signified for him that the forms of his pictures were constructed from symbolic patterns of color and linear rhythms and were not mere scientific reproductions of what is seen by the eye.
Dempsey, A., and Dempsey, A. (2010). Styles, Schools and Movements: The Essential Encyclopaedic Guide to Modern Art. London: Thames and Hudson.
Given the passage's discussion of Synthetist-Symbolism, and some undiscussed remarks about how Japanese art influenced Gauguin's work, which of these features of Japanese painting can be reasonably assumed to characterize Gauguin's art form?
A. Use of strong colors and compositional freedom
B. Use of fluid curved lines
C. Use of animals and landscapes as subjects
D. Use of narrative elements to express ideas
Gauguin's attitude toward art marked a break from the past and a beginning to modern art. Like all Post- Impressionist artists, he passed through an Impressionist phase but became quickly dissatisfied with the limitations of the style, and went on to discover a new style that had the directness and universality of a symbol and that concentrated on impressions, ideas and experiences. The beginning of his modern tradition lay in his rejection of Impressionism. He considered naturalism an error to be avoided. He was preoccupied with suggestion rather than description, seeking to portray not the exterior, but the essence of things in their purest, simplest, and most primitive form, which could only be achieved through simplification of the form. He firmly believed throughout his life that "art is an abstraction" and that "this abstraction [must be derived] from nature while dreaming before it." One must think of the creation that will result rather than the model, and not try to render the model exactly as one sees it. This was the birth of "Synthetism" or rather Synthetist-Symbolic, as Gauguin referred to it, using the term "symbolic" to indicate that the forms and patterns in his pictures were meant to suggest mental images or ideas and not simply to record visual experience.
Symbolism flourished around the period of 1885 to 1910 and can be defined as the rejection of direct, literal representation in favor of evocation and suggestion. Painters tried to give a visual expression to emotional experiences, and therefore the movement was a reaction against the naturalistic aims of Impressionism. Satisfying the need for a more spiritual or emotional approach in art, Symbolism is characterized by the desire to seek refuge in a dreamworld of beauty and the belief that color and line in themselves could express ideas. Stylistically, the tendency was towards flattened forms and broad areas of color, and features of the movement were an intense religious feeling and an interest in subjects of death, disease, and sin.
Similarly, "Synthetism" involved the simplification of forms into large-scale patterns and the expressive purification of colors. Form and color had to be simplified for the sake of expression. This style reacted against the "formlessness" of Impressionism and favored painting subjectively and expressing one's ideas rather than relying on external objects as subject matters. It was characterized by areas of pure colors, very defined contours, an emphasis on pattern and decorative qualities, and a relative absence of shadows.
Gauguin's new art form merged these two movements and succeeded in freeing color, form, and line, bringing it to express the artists' emotions, sensibilities, and personal experiences of the world around them. His style created a break with the old tradition of descriptive naturalism and favored the synthesis of observation and imagination. Gauguin sustained that forms are not discovered in nature but in one's wild imagination, and it was in himself that he searched rather than in his surroundings. For this reason, he scorned the Impressionists for their lack of imagination and their mere scientific reasoning. Furthermore, Gauguin used color unnaturalistically for its decorative or emotional effect and reintroduced emphatic outlines. "Synthetism" signified for him that the forms of his pictures were constructed from symbolic patterns of color and linear rhythms and were not mere scientific reproductions of what is seen by the eye.
Dempsey, A., and Dempsey, A. (2010). Styles, Schools and Movements: The Essential Encyclopaedic Guide to Modern Art. London: Thames and Hudson.
According to the passage, Gauguin rejected Impressionism for a number of reasons. Which of the following reasons CANNOT be inferred to have been a motive of this rejection?
A. Lack of flexibility within the style of Impressionism
B. Lack of intense feelings and emotions in Impressionism
C. Lack of beauty in Impressionism
D. Lack of imagination in Impressionism
Gauguin's attitude toward art marked a break from the past and a beginning to modern art. Like all Post- Impressionist artists, he passed through an Impressionist phase but became quickly dissatisfied with the limitations of the style, and went on to discover a new style that had the directness and universality of a symbol and that concentrated on impressions, ideas and experiences. The beginning of his modern tradition lay in his rejection of Impressionism. He considered naturalism an error to be avoided. He was preoccupied with suggestion rather than description, seeking to portray not the exterior, but the essence of things in their purest, simplest, and most primitive form, which could only be achieved through simplification of the form. He firmly believed throughout his life that "art is an abstraction" and that "this abstraction [must be derived] from nature while dreaming before it." One must think of the creation that will result rather than the model, and not try to render the model exactly as one sees it. This was the birth of "Synthetism" or rather Synthetist-Symbolic, as Gauguin referred to it, using the term "symbolic" to indicate that the forms and patterns in his pictures were meant to suggest mental images or ideas and not simply to record visual experience.
Symbolism flourished around the period of 1885 to 1910 and can be defined as the rejection of direct, literal representation in favor of evocation and suggestion. Painters tried to give a visual expression to emotional experiences, and therefore the movement was a reaction against the naturalistic aims of Impressionism. Satisfying the need for a more spiritual or emotional approach in art, Symbolism is characterized by the desire to seek refuge in a dreamworld of beauty and the belief that color and line in themselves could express ideas. Stylistically, the tendency was towards flattened forms and broad areas of color, and features of the movement were an intense religious feeling and an interest in subjects of death, disease, and sin.
Similarly, "Synthetism" involved the simplification of forms into large-scale patterns and the expressive purification of colors. Form and color had to be simplified for the sake of expression. This style reacted against the "formlessness" of Impressionism and favored painting subjectively and expressing one's ideas rather than relying on external objects as subject matters. It was characterized by areas of pure colors, very defined contours, an emphasis on pattern and decorative qualities, and a relative absence of shadows.
Gauguin's new art form merged these two movements and succeeded in freeing color, form, and line, bringing it to express the artists' emotions, sensibilities, and personal experiences of the world around them. His style created a break with the old tradition of descriptive naturalism and favored the synthesis of observation and imagination. Gauguin sustained that forms are not discovered in nature but in one's wild imagination, and it was in himself that he searched rather than in his surroundings. For this reason, he scorned the Impressionists for their lack of imagination and their mere scientific reasoning. Furthermore, Gauguin used color unnaturalistically for its decorative or emotional effect and reintroduced emphatic outlines. "Synthetism" signified for him that the forms of his pictures were constructed from symbolic patterns of color and linear rhythms and were not mere scientific reproductions of what is seen by the eye.
Dempsey, A., and Dempsey, A. (2010). Styles, Schools and Movements: The Essential Encyclopaedic Guide to Modern Art. London: Thames and Hudson.
Which of these quotes from fellow painters would Gauguin be LEAST likely to agree with, based on passage information?
A. "Treat nature in terms of the cylinder, the sphere, and the cone." (Paul Cezanne)
B. "There is only one true thing: instantly paint what you see. When you've got it, you've got it. When you haven't, you begin again." (ouard Manet)
C. "Paintings have a life of their own that derives from the painter's soul." (Vincent van Gogh)
D. "Painting is a blind man's profession. He paints not what he sees, but what he feels, what he tells himself about what he has seen." (Pablo Picasso)
Gauguin's attitude toward art marked a break from the past and a beginning to modern art. Like all Post- Impressionist artists, he passed through an Impressionist phase but became quickly dissatisfied with the limitations of the style, and went on to discover a new style that had the directness and universality of a symbol and that concentrated on impressions, ideas and experiences. The beginning of his modern tradition lay in his rejection of Impressionism. He considered naturalism an error to be avoided. He was preoccupied with suggestion rather than description, seeking to portray not the exterior, but the essence of things in their purest, simplest, and most primitive form, which could only be achieved through simplification of the form. He firmly believed throughout his life that "art is an abstraction" and that "this abstraction [must be derived] from nature while dreaming before it." One must think of the creation that will result rather than the model, and not try to render the model exactly as one sees it. This was the birth of "Synthetism" or rather Synthetist-Symbolic, as Gauguin referred to it, using the term "symbolic" to indicate that the forms and patterns in his pictures were meant to suggest mental images or ideas and not simply to record visual experience.
Symbolism flourished around the period of 1885 to 1910 and can be defined as the rejection of direct, literal representation in favor of evocation and suggestion. Painters tried to give a visual expression to emotional experiences, and therefore the movement was a reaction against the naturalistic aims of Impressionism. Satisfying the need for a more spiritual or emotional approach in art, Symbolism is characterized by the desire to seek refuge in a dreamworld of beauty and the belief that color and line in themselves could express ideas. Stylistically, the tendency was towards flattened forms and broad areas of color, and features of the movement were an intense religious feeling and an interest in subjects of death, disease, and sin.
Similarly, "Synthetism" involved the simplification of forms into large-scale patterns and the expressive purification of colors. Form and color had to be simplified for the sake of expression. This style reacted against the "formlessness" of Impressionism and favored painting subjectively and expressing one's ideas rather than relying on external objects as subject matters. It was characterized by areas of pure colors, very defined contours, an emphasis on pattern and decorative qualities, and a relative absence of shadows.
Gauguin's new art form merged these two movements and succeeded in freeing color, form, and line, bringing it to express the artists' emotions, sensibilities, and personal experiences of the world around them. His style created a break with the old tradition of descriptive naturalism and favored the synthesis of observation and imagination. Gauguin sustained that forms are not discovered in nature but in one's wild imagination, and it was in himself that he searched rather than in his surroundings. For this reason, he scorned the Impressionists for their lack of imagination and their mere scientific reasoning. Furthermore, Gauguin used color unnaturalistically for its decorative or emotional effect and reintroduced emphatic outlines. "Synthetism" signified for him that the forms of his pictures were constructed from symbolic patterns of color and linear rhythms and were not mere scientific reproductions of what is seen by the eye.
Dempsey, A., and Dempsey, A. (2010). Styles, Schools and Movements: The Essential Encyclopaedic Guide to Modern Art. London: Thames and Hudson.
Which of the following hypothetical pieces of evidence would diminish the author's claims about the importance of Gauguin?
A. Evidence that Gauguin's style of painting was based on work by van Gogh and other painters active during the 1870s and 80s.
B. Evidence that both Gauguin and the Impressionists rejected the more formal and conventional realism of the early 1800s.
C. Photographic evidence that some of Gauguin's works bear no apparent resemblance to the landscape they were supposedly based on.
D. Evidence that the Impressionists' works were considered just as shocking and revolutionary in their time as Gauguin's work would later be.
Gauguin's attitude toward art marked a break from the past and a beginning to modern art. Like all Post- Impressionist artists, he passed through an Impressionist phase but became quickly dissatisfied with the limitations of the style, and went on to discover a new style that had the directness and universality of a symbol and that concentrated on impressions, ideas and experiences. The beginning of his modern tradition lay in his rejection of Impressionism. He considered naturalism an error to be avoided. He was preoccupied with suggestion rather than description, seeking to portray not the exterior, but the essence of things in their purest, simplest, and most primitive form, which could only be achieved through simplification of the form. He firmly believed throughout his life that "art is an abstraction" and that "this abstraction [must be derived] from nature while dreaming before it." One must think of the creation that will result rather than the model, and not try to render the model exactly as one sees it. This was the birth of "Synthetism" or rather Synthetist-Symbolic, as Gauguin referred to it, using the term "symbolic" to indicate that the forms and patterns in his pictures were meant to suggest mental images or ideas and not simply to record visual experience.
Symbolism flourished around the period of 1885 to 1910 and can be defined as the rejection of direct, literal representation in favor of evocation and suggestion. Painters tried to give a visual expression to emotional experiences, and therefore the movement was a reaction against the naturalistic aims of Impressionism. Satisfying the need for a more spiritual or emotional approach in art, Symbolism is characterized by the desire to seek refuge in a dreamworld of beauty and the belief that color and line in themselves could express ideas. Stylistically, the tendency was towards flattened forms and broad areas of color, and features of the movement were an intense religious feeling and an interest in subjects of death, disease, and sin.
Similarly, "Synthetism" involved the simplification of forms into large-scale patterns and the expressive purification of colors. Form and color had to be simplified for the sake of expression. This style reacted against the "formlessness" of Impressionism and favored painting subjectively and expressing one's ideas rather than relying on external objects as subject matters. It was characterized by areas of pure colors, very defined contours, an emphasis on pattern and decorative qualities, and a relative absence of shadows.
Gauguin's new art form merged these two movements and succeeded in freeing color, form, and line, bringing it to express the artists' emotions, sensibilities, and personal experiences of the world around them. His style created a break with the old tradition of descriptive naturalism and favored the synthesis of observation and imagination. Gauguin sustained that forms are not discovered in nature but in one's wild imagination, and it was in himself that he searched rather than in his surroundings. For this reason, he scorned the Impressionists for their lack of imagination and their mere scientific reasoning. Furthermore, Gauguin used color unnaturalistically for its decorative or emotional effect and reintroduced emphatic outlines. "Synthetism" signified for him that the forms of his pictures were constructed from symbolic patterns of color and linear rhythms and were not mere scientific reproductions of what is seen by the eye.
Dempsey, A., and Dempsey, A. (2010). Styles, Schools and Movements: The Essential Encyclopaedic Guide to Modern Art. London: Thames and Hudson.
According to passage information, what can we infer that Symbolism and Impressionism had in common?
A. Both saw ideas as crucial to the impact of a work.
B. Both focused on representing nature rather than man-made objects.
C. Both considered the artist's subjective experience to be a key element to the work.
D. Both thought art needed to express the idiosyncratic nature of the artist rather than pleasing society.
Gauguin's attitude toward art marked a break from the past and a beginning to modern art. Like all Post- Impressionist artists, he passed through an Impressionist phase but became quickly dissatisfied with the limitations of the style, and went on to discover a new style that had the directness and universality of a symbol and that concentrated on impressions, ideas and experiences. The beginning of his modern tradition lay in his rejection of Impressionism. He considered naturalism an error to be avoided. He was preoccupied with suggestion rather than description, seeking to portray not the exterior, but the essence of things in their purest, simplest, and most primitive form, which could only be achieved through simplification of the form. He firmly believed throughout his life that "art is an abstraction" and that "this abstraction [must be derived] from nature while dreaming before it." One must think of the creation that will result rather than the model, and not try to render the model exactly as one sees it. This was the birth of "Synthetism" or rather Synthetist-Symbolic, as Gauguin referred to it, using the term "symbolic" to indicate that the forms and patterns in his pictures were meant to suggest mental images or ideas and not simply to record visual experience.
Symbolism flourished around the period of 1885 to 1910 and can be defined as the rejection of direct, literal representation in favor of evocation and suggestion. Painters tried to give a visual expression to emotional experiences, and therefore the movement was a reaction against the naturalistic aims of Impressionism. Satisfying the need for a more spiritual or emotional approach in art, Symbolism is characterized by the desire to seek refuge in a dreamworld of beauty and the belief that color and line in themselves could express ideas. Stylistically, the tendency was towards flattened forms and broad areas of color, and features of the movement were an intense religious feeling and an interest in subjects of death, disease, and sin.
Similarly, "Synthetism" involved the simplification of forms into large-scale patterns and the expressive purification of colors. Form and color had to be simplified for the sake of expression. This style reacted against the "formlessness" of Impressionism and favored painting subjectively and expressing one's ideas rather than relying on external objects as subject matters. It was characterized by areas of pure colors, very defined contours, an emphasis on pattern and decorative qualities, and a relative absence of shadows.
Gauguin's new art form merged these two movements and succeeded in freeing color, form, and line, bringing it to express the artists' emotions, sensibilities, and personal experiences of the world around them. His style created a break with the old tradition of descriptive naturalism and favored the synthesis of observation and imagination. Gauguin sustained that forms are not discovered in nature but in one's wild imagination, and it was in himself that he searched rather than in his surroundings. For this reason, he scorned the Impressionists for their lack of imagination and their mere scientific reasoning. Furthermore, Gauguin used color unnaturalistically for its decorative or emotional effect and reintroduced emphatic outlines. "Synthetism" signified for him that the forms of his pictures were constructed from symbolic patterns of color and linear rhythms and were not mere scientific reproductions of what is seen by the eye.
Dempsey, A., and Dempsey, A. (2010). Styles, Schools and Movements: The Essential Encyclopaedic Guide to Modern Art. London: Thames and Hudson.
Based on passage information, which of the following can you infer to be among the principles of Impressionism?
A. Representing idealized versions of reality as they exist in the artist's mind or memory
B. Representing reality using technical tools such as photography to capture their exact appearance
C. Representing the feelings derived from an experience through vibrant colors and lines
D. Representing the outward forms of things exactly as they appear to the eye, focusing on color and light instead of outline
As Alice Echols went on to claim, "Nothing seems to conjure up the 1970s quite so effectively as disco. Even at the time, critics remarked upon disco's neat encapsulation of that decade's zeitgeist. `It must be clear by now to everyone with an ear or an eye that this era,' wrote journalist Andrew Kopkind in 1979, `is already the Disco Years, whether it will be called by that name or not.' A former sixties radical, Kopkind was by turns fascinated, bemused, and appalled by the disco epoch, and he likely imagined that in years to come fellow cultural critics would share his interest. But the seventies have not loomed large in our national imagination, except perhaps as comic relief. For many Americans, these were the forgettable years.
That forgettability owes a lot to the 1960s, the outsized decade that dwarfs all others in recent memory. The sixties will always be remembered for their audacity, whether found in the courage of civil rights protesters who put their bodies on the line or in those doomed but beautiful rock stars who tried breaking through to the other side. By contrast, the seventies seem the decade when nothing, or nothing good, happened ?an era memorable for the country's hapless presidents, declining prestige, bad fashions, ludicrous music, and such over-the-top narcissism that Tom Wolfe dubbed it the `Me Decade.' Before the decade was out, this narrative of decline had become routine. `After the poetry of the Beatles comes the monotonous bass-pedal bombardment of Donna Summer,' huffed one New York Times writer in 1979. It is a measure of the era's persistent bad press that a recent book challenging this view carries the pleading title Something Happened.
As for the sixties, it doesn't matter how much silliness went down, we still invest those times with seismic significance. Take Joe Cocker's performance at Woodstock. His spasmodic thrashing about and his vocals, slurred to the point of incomprehensibility, are something of a joke today. Cringe-inducing though it may be, however, Cocker's performance is never made to stand in for the whole of the sixties. The sixties remain enveloped in the gauzy sentimentalism of what might have been. Yet the iconic image of John Travolta as dance-floor king Tony Manero in white polyester suit, arm thrust to the disco heavens, has come to symbolize the narcissistic imbecility and inconsequentiality of the disco years.
Were it not for the Rubaiyat, I, too, might well regard the seventies as a lamentable and regrettable period in American history. The Rubaiyat was, yes, a disco. It was located in the heart of sixtiesland: Ann Arbor, Michigan, the home of the University of Michigan and legendary incubator of radical activism. At the height of the seventies, the town's annual Hash Bash ?a smoke-in to reform marijuana laws ?was still going strong and so were its two food co-ops-one reform, the other orthodox when it came to selling white foods (that is, rice, sugar, and flour of the white variety). Ann Arbor also had bookstores galore, including the original, wonderful Borders Bookstore, and any number of hippie-ish restaurants and bars such as the Fleetwood Diner, the Del Rio, and the Blind Pig. Musically, it prided itself on its vintage music (it hosted one of the earliest blues festivals), but at heart it was a rock town besotted with Iggy Pop and the Stooges and Sonic's Rendezvous, a band fronted by Patti Smith's future husband, Fred Smith. Its leading music store, Schoolkids' Records, stocked disco, but never played it. All of this is to say that disco-averse Ann Arbor came close to providing something of a safe haven from glitterball culture.
The Rubaiyat was no red-velvet-rope disco where fashionista doormen determined who was sufficiently fabulous to gain entry. This would never have worked in a town where down jackets and army surplus were hardly an unusual sight. The club did have some pretensions to classiness, but the mismatched, sagging booths and bordello red defeated occasional efforts at upmarket sophistication. What the Rubaiyat did have were better-than-average speakers, a heterogeneous cliente, and a weekend cover of three dollars."
Echols, A. (2011). Hot stuff: Disco and the Remaking of American Culture. New York: W. W. Norton.
The author most closely means which of the following in paragraph 2 by "narrative of decline"?
A. A work of history that focuses on a period when culture was becoming more stagnant, such as the 60s- 70s.
B. A version of 20th century history in which 60s idealism, peace and progress gave way to 70s crime, violence and racism.
C. A version of history in which an author fits the facts into an overarching schema in which things were becoming dramatically worse.
D. A version of 20th century history that claims the 60s was a failure because its ambitions were not fulfilled.
Nowadays, the certification exams become more and more important and required by more and more enterprises when applying for a job. But how to prepare for the exam effectively? How to prepare for the exam in a short time with less efforts? How to get a ideal result and how to find the most reliable resources? Here on Vcedump.com, you will find all the answers. Vcedump.com provide not only Medical Tests exam questions, answers and explanations but also complete assistance on your exam preparation and certification application. If you are confused on your MCAT-TEST exam preparations and Medical Tests certification application, do not hesitate to visit our Vcedump.com to find your solutions here.