PT109.S2.P2.Q13

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22

PASSAGE 4

Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27 Question 28

SECTION 3 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 4 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

Not supported, because the author denies the view that Jacobs allowed the domestic novel genre to overshadow her own experiences. The critics would agree with (A), but not the author.

Not supported, because although Jacobs wrote a narrative that was part of the domestic novel genre, it didn’t conform to the conventions of that genre in every way. Rather, the narrative showed that certain aspects of the protagonist couldn’t be understood without abandoning convention.

Not supported, because the author never indicates an opinion about the level of power in a story and whether autobiographies should seek to tell stories that are powerful. In fact, the author never expresses an opinion about what an autobiography “should” do. She does describe what Jacobs’ novel in fact does, but this doesn’t tell us what the author believes autobiographies should do.

The author never expresses an opinion about how autobiographies “should be evaluated.” The author focuses on showing that critics’ view of what Jacobs’ narrative does is wrong; but the author never suggests that the critics were evaluating autobiographies using the wrong criteria.