题目信息
Critics maintain that the fiction of Herman Melville
(1819–1891) has limitations, such as its lack
of inventive plots after Moby-Dick (1851) and its
occasionally inscrutable style. A more serious, yet
problematic, charge is that Melville is a deficient
writer because he is not a practitioner of the “art of
fiction,” as critics have conceived of this art since the
late nineteenth-century essays and novels of Henry
James. Indeed, most twentieth-century commentators
regard Melville not as a novelist but as a writer of
romance, since they believe that Melville's fiction
lacks the continuity that James viewed as essential
to a novel: the continuity between what characters
feel or think and what they do, and the continuity
between characters' fates and their pasts or original
social classes. Critics argue that only Pierre (1852),
because of its subject and its characters, is close to
being a novel in the Jamesian sense.
However, although Melville is not a Jamesian
novelist, he is not therefore a deficient writer. A more
reasonable position is that Melville is a different
kind of writer, who held, and should be judged
by, presuppositions about fiction that are quite
different from James's. It is true that Melville wrote
“romances”; however, these are not the escapist
fictions this word often implies, but fictions that
range freely among very unusual or intense human
experiences. Melville portrayed such experiences
because he believed these best enabled him to
explore moral questions, an exploration he assumed
was the ultimate purpose of fiction. He was content
to sacrifice continuity or even credibility as long
as he could establish a significant moral situation.
Thus Melville's romances do not give the reader
a full understanding of the complete feelings and
thoughts that motivate actions and events that shape
fate. Rather, the romances leave unexplained the
sequence of events and either simplify or obscure
motives. Again, such simplifications and obscurities
exist in order to give prominence to the depiction of
sharply delineated moral values, values derived from
a character's purely personal sense of honor, rather
than, as in a Jamesian novel, from the conventions of
society.
(1819–1891) has limitations, such as its lack
of inventive plots after Moby-Dick (1851) and its
occasionally inscrutable style. A more serious, yet
problematic, charge is that Melville is a deficient
writer because he is not a practitioner of the “art of
fiction,” as critics have conceived of this art since the
late nineteenth-century essays and novels of Henry
James. Indeed, most twentieth-century commentators
regard Melville not as a novelist but as a writer of
romance, since they believe that Melville's fiction
lacks the continuity that James viewed as essential
to a novel: the continuity between what characters
feel or think and what they do, and the continuity
between characters' fates and their pasts or original
social classes. Critics argue that only Pierre (1852),
because of its subject and its characters, is close to
being a novel in the Jamesian sense.
However, although Melville is not a Jamesian
novelist, he is not therefore a deficient writer. A more
reasonable position is that Melville is a different
kind of writer, who held, and should be judged
by, presuppositions about fiction that are quite
different from James's. It is true that Melville wrote
“romances”; however, these are not the escapist
fictions this word often implies, but fictions that
range freely among very unusual or intense human
experiences. Melville portrayed such experiences
because he believed these best enabled him to
explore moral questions, an exploration he assumed
was the ultimate purpose of fiction. He was content
to sacrifice continuity or even credibility as long
as he could establish a significant moral situation.
Thus Melville's romances do not give the reader
a full understanding of the complete feelings and
thoughts that motivate actions and events that shape
fate. Rather, the romances leave unexplained the
sequence of events and either simplify or obscure
motives. Again, such simplifications and obscurities
exist in order to give prominence to the depiction of
sharply delineated moral values, values derived from
a character's purely personal sense of honor, rather
than, as in a Jamesian novel, from the conventions of
society.
The author probably mentions Melville's Pierre to
A:refute those literary critics who have made generalizations about the quality of Melville's fiction
B:argue that the portrayal of characters is one of Melville's more accomplished literary skills
C:give an example of a novel that was thought by James to resemble his own fiction
D:suggest that literary critics find few exceptions to what they believe is a characteristic of Melville's fiction
E:reinforce the contention of literary critics
参考答案及共享解析
共享解析来源为网络权威资源、GMAT高分考生等； 如有疑问，欢迎在评论区提问与讨论
本题耗时：
已选答案：
正确答案：
D:suggest that literary critics find few exceptions to what they believe is a characteristic of Melville's fiction
答案 D
题目大意
作者提到梅尔维尔的那部小说的目的：
为什么这篇文章的作者提到皮埃尔？第一段的最后一句话是：批评家认为只有彼埃尔（1852），因为它的主题和特征，接近于詹姆士意识的小说。
这一陈述表明，文学批评家认为彼埃尔是Melville小说浪漫主义负面表征的唯一例外，因为彼埃尔至少有一些杰姆斯认为文学价值小说必不可少的特性。
A.驳斥那些对Melville小说质量进行概括的文学批评家。这并不是一个提及彼埃尔的目的，这篇文章并没有引用任何批评家声称Melville的大多数小说都能满足他的标准。
B.认为对人物的刻画是梅尔维尔更为高超的文学技巧之一。这并不是提及彼埃尔的目的。文章的作者并不赞同人物塑造是Melville小说的一种特殊力量的观点。事实上，作者认为Melville的小说倾向于对人物的感受或思考提出质疑。
C.举一个詹姆斯认为与自己小说相似的小说的例子。这篇文章没有任何信息表明詹姆斯对皮埃尔的个人看法。鉴于文章中的信息，詹姆斯完全有可能从未读过皮埃尔。
D.认为文学评论家几乎没有找到梅尔维尔小说的特点的例外。Melville小说的批评家们一般认为他们是“传奇”而不是“小说”，因为他们缺乏某些本质上被认为是小说必不可少的东西，亨利·詹姆斯认为这是小说的本质。有人提到，评论家认为这是Melville小说中唯一可能符合美国标准的小说。
E.加强文学评论家的争论。在提到皮埃尔的那句话中，这段话的作者不赞成批评认为梅尔维尔的作品是浪漫主义而不是小说。此外，这句话无意支持任何其他类型的文学评论家的论点。
题目大意
作者提到梅尔维尔的那部小说的目的：
为什么这篇文章的作者提到皮埃尔？第一段的最后一句话是：批评家认为只有彼埃尔（1852），因为它的主题和特征，接近于詹姆士意识的小说。
这一陈述表明，文学批评家认为彼埃尔是Melville小说浪漫主义负面表征的唯一例外，因为彼埃尔至少有一些杰姆斯认为文学价值小说必不可少的特性。
A.驳斥那些对Melville小说质量进行概括的文学批评家。这并不是一个提及彼埃尔的目的，这篇文章并没有引用任何批评家声称Melville的大多数小说都能满足他的标准。
B.认为对人物的刻画是梅尔维尔更为高超的文学技巧之一。这并不是提及彼埃尔的目的。文章的作者并不赞同人物塑造是Melville小说的一种特殊力量的观点。事实上，作者认为Melville的小说倾向于对人物的感受或思考提出质疑。
C.举一个詹姆斯认为与自己小说相似的小说的例子。这篇文章没有任何信息表明詹姆斯对皮埃尔的个人看法。鉴于文章中的信息，詹姆斯完全有可能从未读过皮埃尔。
D.认为文学评论家几乎没有找到梅尔维尔小说的特点的例外。Melville小说的批评家们一般认为他们是“传奇”而不是“小说”，因为他们缺乏某些本质上被认为是小说必不可少的东西，亨利·詹姆斯认为这是小说的本质。有人提到，评论家认为这是Melville小说中唯一可能符合美国标准的小说。
E.加强文学评论家的争论。在提到皮埃尔的那句话中，这段话的作者不赞成批评认为梅尔维尔的作品是浪漫主义而不是小说。此外，这句话无意支持任何其他类型的文学评论家的论点。
加入收藏
在线答疑
题目来源
