
Reading Passage Question
Surveying paradigmatic works of tragic literature from antiquity to the present alongside the immense and ever-growing body of secondary literature on the subject, the literary critic Terry Eagleton arrived at the pat judgment that not only had no satisfactory definition of tragedy been offered to date, but also that none besides the admittedly vacuous “very sad” could ever be offered. Overly broad definitions, which for all intents and purposes equate the tragic with seriousness, lead invariably to Scylla; overly narrow ones, such as the Renaissance-inspired struggle theory, to Charybdis. Notwithstanding this definitional dilemma, Eagleton’s conclusion, as clear a case of defeatism as any heretofore advanced, leaves much to be desired.
In A Definition of Tragedy, Oscar Mandel, who is decidedly more sanguine than Eagleton on this score, discerns in Aristotle’s De Poetica the rudiments of a substantive definition of the tragic. Following the spirit, albeit not the letter, of Aristotle’s text, Mandel sets forth three requirements for any work to be counted as tragic, the third weighing most heavily in his account. First, it must have a protagonist whom we highly (or at least moderately) esteem. Second, it must show how the protagonist comes to suffer greatly. And, third, it must reveal how the protagonist’s downfall was inevitably but unwittingly brought about by his or her own action. It is plain to see that, of the three requirements, the third (call this the inevitability requirement) is beyond question the most contentious as well as the most dubious. The truth is that the inevitability requirement is entirely too stringent. While it may be a sufficient condition, it is not, Mandel’s assertions notwithstanding, the sin qua non of tragic literature.
One need look no further than Anton Chekhov’s Three Sisters, a quintessential work of modern tragedy, to see why this is so. In a provincial capital quite remote from cosmopolitan Moscow, the well-educated, tireless, but spiritually drained sisters are ground down by the inexorable forces of time and fortune. Their failure to leave for Moscow, the childhood home they yearn for, can be understood as their failure to extricate themselves from the tedious and insufferable life brought on by their workaday habits. This suggests a certain acknowledgment on their part of their powerlessness to defy the hands of fate. In the final analysis, the question of whether the protagonist’s fate is sealed in consequence of tragic action, as in Greek and Renaissance tragic dramas, or of inaction, as with modern tragedies, has very little to do with one of the absolutely essential ingredients of tragic literature. That ingredient, of course, is the profound sense of insurmountable powerlessness that yields an unnamable, implacable feeling expressing alienation from life itself.
"Surveying paradigmatic works of tragic literature from antiquity to"- is a GMAT reading comprehension exercise. Candidates need to be highly proficient in GMAT reading comprehension. There are 8 comprehension questions in this GMAT reading comprehension section. The purpose of the GMAT Reading Comprehension questions is to evaluate candidates' comprehension, analysis, and application skills. Candidates who are actively preparing can benefit from GMAT Reading Comprehension Practice Questions.
Solution and Explanation
Answer: (E)
Explanation: The last option is the correct answer. This is because the author clearly alludes to Scylla and Charybdis in the first paragraph. This is done to delineate the potential problems that await anyone who wishes to define tragedy. The remaining options do not correspond to the passage.
Answer: (D)
Explanation: The passage's main purpose is to criticize Eagleton's view that tragedy cannot be adequately defined. It also criticizes Mandel's view that tragedy requires tragic action, and to propose another condition necessary for tragedy. Only the fourth option is correct because it corresponds to this, whereas the others are either extreme or opposite.
Answer: (A)
Explanation: The first option is the right answer as it best fits the characterization of the three sisters by the author. All others are wrong answers as it does not match the author’s attitude towards the sisters.
Answer: (B)
Explanation: As can be inferred from the passage, the second option is the correct answer. The first option is the exact opposite, as the others are either out of scope, extreme, or do not support the author's point of view.
Answer: (C)
Explanation: The author clearly expresses dissatisfaction with the current conception of tragedy in the third paragraph. This is done by raising a pointed objection to Mandel's definition of tragedy and supporting the objection with a counterexample. In conclusion, the third option is the correct answer and the other options are incorrect because they contain distorted information or opposing views.
Answer: (E)
Explanation: Only the last option perfectly fits the author's point of view and is thus the correct answer. The remaining options are incorrect because they do not correspond to the explanation in the passage.
Suggested GMAT Reading Comprehension Samples
*The article might have information for the previous academic years, please refer the official website of the exam.