Q10

[seychelles1718]

Where do we get the support for the "ornamental" in E ?

[ohthatpatrick]

Good question! I hate modern RC. They take too many liberties with language and ask us to pick the "best supported" answer, even though the answer still feels inadequately supported.

I think it's important for (E) that you read "ornamental" as a synonym for "decorative, meant to be visually interesting".

(I initially read "ornamental" more as an opposite for "austere" ... one is highly embellished, one is understated).

But if you read (E) as "much of her later work was functional as well as meant to be visually interesting", it sounds a lot safer.

If you think about the previous paragraph describing folding screens, you get a good line reference. Line 32-34 says that the screen was "a painting (ornamental), a piece of furniture (functional), and an architectural element all at once."

Line 40-41 is saying how Gray's work in interior design (ornamental work) prefigures her work as an architect (functional work).

Hope this helps.

[JorieB701]

I’m curious if support for E could also maybe be in lines 37-39. I read E as basically saying, “much of her later work was functional, (as in it serves some sort of purpose), and it was also nice to look at.”
So I zoned in on the last sentence of the second paragraph where it starts with, “she often...blah blah blah,” because the second paragraph as a whole seems committed to describing the evolution of her work using particular examples, and only right in the end, the last two sentences, does the author describe what can be attributed to her work generally as a result. Am I reading this right?

But looking at E, I read, “meet their occupants’ needs” as “functional,” and “visually austere” as something the author, as well as Gray herself, would possibly consider to be beautiful. Because in lines 13-17, the author describes Gray’s artistic sensibilities as “preferring the austere beauty of straight lines and simple forms juxtaposed”-this kind of reads like author’s opinion. So by “creating furniture and environments” that the author describes as “visually austere” I can infer that the author probably thought they looked nice.

Is this reaching?

[SilvaS630]

jorieB071, I used the same to textual references (last sentence of paragraph 2 and second sentence of paragraph 2), so it was reassuring to see your logic. I'm not sure it it's reaching or whether there may be other evidence. Does anyone know?

[Misti Duvall]

I think you could make the case for "visually austere" as something Gray might see as beautiful, but I'd be hesitant to use it to support "ornamental" on its own. I think the lines Patrick notes above are safer support.

Hope this helps.