Question 1
A short story about a refugee is told entirely through the eyes of a border guard who repeatedly describes the refugee as 'suspicious' without evidence. What is the most reasonable claim about the writer's intention?No clue? Show me the answer
Correct answerCorrect!
IncorrectStep-by-step walkthrough
Choose a solution method
Method #1Direct reasoningStep 1: Identify the key warning from the content
The content explicitly warns not to confuse a character's perspective with the author's perspective, since a writer can give a character biased thoughts to criticize that bias.
Step 2: Apply this to the guard
The guard's repeated unsupported claims of 'suspicious' without evidence is a textual detail suggesting the writer is showing bias in action, not stating fact.
Step 3: Interpret the effect on readers
By showing the guard's judgment as baseless, the writer likely positions readers to notice and question the prejudice rather than adopt it themselves.
Step 4: Select the best-supported claim
This matches the idea that intention should be built from a specific choice in the text, which points to exposing bias, not repeating it.
Method #2Process of eliminationStep 1: Eliminate endorsing distrust
This assumes the character's view is the author's view, which the content specifically warns against.
Step 2: Eliminate 'no intention'
Every deliberate choice, including a biased narrator, is a craft lever suggesting purpose, so 'no intention' ignores the evidence.
Step 3: Eliminate 'always correct'
This again mistakes the guard's flawed viewpoint for the writer's argument, which is the exact confusion the content cautions against.
Step 4: Confirm the remaining option
Only the option distinguishing character bias from authorial critique is supported by the textual evidence described.
Question 2
In a war poem, the writer uses long, flowing sentences describing soldiers marching triumphantly beneath waving flags, paired with words like 'glory' and 'honour.' Which intention does this evidence best support?No clue? Show me the answer
Correct answerCorrect!IncorrectStep-by-step walkthrough
Choose a solution method
Method #1Direct reasoningStep 1: Identify the evidence
The poem uses flowing sentences, waving flags, and words like 'glory' and 'honour', all positive and celebratory connotations.
Step 2: Apply the language lever
The content explains that word choice and connotation are craft levers writers pull to build particular effects, here uplift rather than distress.
Step 3: Interpret the likely response
These choices are designed to build pride and admiration in the reader, consistent with honouring soldiers rather than condemning war.
Step 4: Select the matching intention
The described evidence directly supports an intention of pride and admiration.
Method #2Process of eliminationStep 1: Eliminate irony reading
Irony would require some contrasting or undercutting detail, but every detail described reinforces celebration, not critique.
Step 2: Eliminate 'no clear purpose'
The content insists stylistic choices reveal purpose, so dismissing intention entirely contradicts the method.
Step 3: Eliminate 'confusion' claim
The described choices are consistent and unified in tone, not contradictory or confusing.
Step 4: Confirm the answer
Only the pride and admiration option matches the consistent celebratory evidence given.
13 more questions in this topic
Pick this up in your Library: it holds the whole topic, notes, cheatsheet and questions. Your answers here are kept on this device.