by christine.defenbaugh Sat Sep 14, 2013 9:12 pm
Our task is to identify the author's primary concern. We're going to be deploying our synthesis skills in full force!
In order to do so, let's take a moment to consider the passage map:
Paragraph 1: outlines the problem musicologists have had in accessing music of the London Pianoforte school (LPS)
Paragraph 2: introduces the Temperley anthology, which makes this music available!
Paragraph 3: debates whether the term 'school' is entirely appropriate for LPS
Paragraph 4: considers Ringer's argument for viewing LPS as a unified 'school', and Temperley's approach, which defines the school by the years
From this skeletal outline, we can see that the focal point of the entire discussion centers on the LPS: their music, their impact, their coherency, etc. Temperley's anthology plays a significant role in this discussion. Indeed, lines 23-29 suggest that by making this music available, this anthology will spur on "new critical perspectives" on piano music and the instrument itself. This lines up nicely with answer choice (E): the author is primarily concerned with the LPS, what we do and do not know about them, and how Temperley's contribution fits into that bigger picture.
Let's take a look at the incorrect answers:
(A) Beethoven is only discussed in paragraph 4, and only as support for Ringer's definition of LPS as a unified school. Way too narrow!
(B) Unsupported. The author never tells us Temperley's view on the contrast between English and European piano music, so it is certainly not the primary concern!
(C) Unsupported. The author never says that Temperley has an evaluation of the impact of changes in piano construction, so that cannot be the primary concern!
(D) Ringer's argument, and the potential alternative to it, are only discussed in paragraph 4. Way too narrow!
Note that (B) and (C) were both tempting in their focus on Temperley. But we are not given much information about Temperley's views/evaluations/analyses. We discuss his anthology, and his concession that the variety in LPS undermines the concept of 'school', and that he defines LPS by the years - that's it. Be very careful not to attribute to Temperley analysis that rightfully belongs to the author!
Please let me know if that answers your question completely!