题目信息
Behind every book review there are two key figures:
a book review editor and a reviewer. Editors decide
whether a book is reviewed in their publication, when
the review appears, how long it is, and who writes the review.
When many periodicals feature the same books,
this does not prove that the editors of different
periodicals have not made individual decisions.
Before publication, editors receive news releases and
printer's proofs of certain books, signifying that the
publishers will make special efforts to promote these
books. They will be heavily advertised and probably
be among the books that most bookstores order in
quantity. Not having such books reviewed might give
the impression that the editor was caught napping,
whereas too many reviews of books that readers will
have trouble finding in stores would be inappropriate.
Editors can risk having a few of the less popular
titles reviewed, but they must consider what will be
newsworthy, advertised, and written about elsewhere.
If these were the only factors influencing editors,
few books that stand little chance of selling well would
ever be reviewed. But editors feel some concern
about what might endure, and therefore listen to
literary experts. A generation ago, a newspaper used
a brilliant system of choosing which books to feature.
The book review editor sent out a greater number of
books than reviews he actually intended to publish.
If a review was unenthusiastic, he reasoned that the
book was not important enough to be discussed
immediately, and if good reviews of enough other
books came in, the unenthusiastic review might never
be printed. The unenthusiastic reviewers were paid
promptly anyway, but they learned that if they wanted
their material to be printed, it was advisable to be
kind.
Most editors print favorable and unfavorable
reviews; however, the content of the review may be
influenced by the editor. Some editors would actually
feel that they had failed in their responsibility if they
gave books by authors they admired to hostile critics
or books by authors they disapproved of to critics
who might favor them. Editors usually can predict who
would review a book enthusiastically and who would
tear it to shreds.
a book review editor and a reviewer. Editors decide
whether a book is reviewed in their publication, when
the review appears, how long it is, and who writes the review.
When many periodicals feature the same books,
this does not prove that the editors of different
periodicals have not made individual decisions.
Before publication, editors receive news releases and
printer's proofs of certain books, signifying that the
publishers will make special efforts to promote these
books. They will be heavily advertised and probably
be among the books that most bookstores order in
quantity. Not having such books reviewed might give
the impression that the editor was caught napping,
whereas too many reviews of books that readers will
have trouble finding in stores would be inappropriate.
Editors can risk having a few of the less popular
titles reviewed, but they must consider what will be
newsworthy, advertised, and written about elsewhere.
If these were the only factors influencing editors,
few books that stand little chance of selling well would
ever be reviewed. But editors feel some concern
about what might endure, and therefore listen to
literary experts. A generation ago, a newspaper used
a brilliant system of choosing which books to feature.
books than reviews he actually intended to publish.
If a review was unenthusiastic, he reasoned that the
book was not important enough to be discussed
immediately, and if good reviews of enough other
books came in, the unenthusiastic review might never
be printed. The unenthusiastic reviewers were paid
promptly anyway, but they learned that if they wanted
their material to be printed, it was advisable to be
kind.
Most editors print favorable and unfavorable
reviews; however, the content of the review may be
influenced by the editor. Some editors would actually
feel that they had failed in their responsibility if they
gave books by authors they admired to hostile critics
or books by authors they disapproved of to critics
who might favor them. Editors usually can predict who
would review a book enthusiastically and who would
tear it to shreds.
The passage provides information to answer which of the following questions?
A:Would most book review editors prefer to have books reviewed without regard to the probable commercial success of the books?
B:Are publishers' efforts to persuade bookstores to order certain books generally effective?
C:On what basis do literary experts decide that a book is or is not important?
D:What criteria are used to determine the length of a particular book review?
E:Have book review practices in general changed significantly since a generation ago?
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：
B:Are publishers' efforts to persuade bookstores to order certain books generally effective?
答案.B
题目大意：文章可以回答下面哪个问题
根据文中给出的信息，五个问题中的哪一个可以回答？这意味着四个答案选择将是根据文章我们无法回答的问题。这些选择中的某些很容易被排除：关于文学专家评价的问题和关于评论长度标准的问题。
关于图书评论实践是否在上一代人中发生了总体变化的问题也很容易消除：一代人之前关于图书评论实践的信息只涉及一家报纸的一名评论编辑所使用的系统。
因此，我们可以将候选答案缩小到以下几个方面：关于预期商业成功与评论编辑偏好的关系的问题，以及关于图书出版商对某些图书的推广努力是否成功说服书店订购大量此类图书的问题。这篇文章有助于回答这两个问题中的哪一个？
A.大多数书评编辑会不会更愿意在不考虑书评可能取得商业成功的情况下进行书评？这篇文章对这个问题既没有明确的“是”也没有明确的“否”答案，至少对于“大多数”图书编辑来说是这样。文章的第二段指出，对书店将订购数量的书籍的期望，在有关出版评论的决策中确实占有重要地位。然而，这并不一定表明大多数编辑更喜欢什么。书评编辑在他们的偏好上有很大的差异是可能的。当然，这并不能回答书评编辑在决定出版书评时是否听取了他们的个人喜好。归根结底，我们没有信息来解决这个问题或其细微差别。
B.出版商说服书店订购某些书籍的努力是否普遍有效？这段话告诉我们，出版商大量刊登广告的书籍很可能是大多数书店订购数量最多的书籍之一。这为这个问题提供了一个“是”的答案。
C.文学专家凭什么认为一本书重要或不重要？这篇文章没有提供关于文学专家如何决定一本书是否“重要”的信息。请注意，这篇文章专门讨论了书评编辑。目前尚不清楚这是否与“文学专家”一样，但我们没有理由这样想。
D.什么样的标准被用来确定一个特定的书评的长度？这篇文章没有提供如何确定书评篇幅的信息。
E.自上一代人以来，书评实践总体上是否发生了重大变化？这段话表明，一代人以前，一家报纸的评论编辑有一套非常出色的体系，只出版那些对特定书籍充满热情的评论。不过，这段文字并没有说明这是当时常见的编辑做法。相反，这篇文章告诉我们，目前大多数编辑都发表正面和负面的评论。文中没有任何内容表明这种做法在一代人以前是不同的。
题目大意：文章可以回答下面哪个问题
根据文中给出的信息，五个问题中的哪一个可以回答？这意味着四个答案选择将是根据文章我们无法回答的问题。这些选择中的某些很容易被排除：关于文学专家评价的问题和关于评论长度标准的问题。
关于图书评论实践是否在上一代人中发生了总体变化的问题也很容易消除：一代人之前关于图书评论实践的信息只涉及一家报纸的一名评论编辑所使用的系统。
因此，我们可以将候选答案缩小到以下几个方面：关于预期商业成功与评论编辑偏好的关系的问题，以及关于图书出版商对某些图书的推广努力是否成功说服书店订购大量此类图书的问题。这篇文章有助于回答这两个问题中的哪一个？
A.大多数书评编辑会不会更愿意在不考虑书评可能取得商业成功的情况下进行书评？这篇文章对这个问题既没有明确的“是”也没有明确的“否”答案，至少对于“大多数”图书编辑来说是这样。文章的第二段指出，对书店将订购数量的书籍的期望，在有关出版评论的决策中确实占有重要地位。然而，这并不一定表明大多数编辑更喜欢什么。书评编辑在他们的偏好上有很大的差异是可能的。当然，这并不能回答书评编辑在决定出版书评时是否听取了他们的个人喜好。归根结底，我们没有信息来解决这个问题或其细微差别。
B.出版商说服书店订购某些书籍的努力是否普遍有效？这段话告诉我们，出版商大量刊登广告的书籍很可能是大多数书店订购数量最多的书籍之一。这为这个问题提供了一个“是”的答案。
C.文学专家凭什么认为一本书重要或不重要？这篇文章没有提供关于文学专家如何决定一本书是否“重要”的信息。请注意，这篇文章专门讨论了书评编辑。目前尚不清楚这是否与“文学专家”一样，但我们没有理由这样想。
D.什么样的标准被用来确定一个特定的书评的长度？这篇文章没有提供如何确定书评篇幅的信息。
E.自上一代人以来，书评实践总体上是否发生了重大变化？这段话表明，一代人以前，一家报纸的评论编辑有一套非常出色的体系，只出版那些对特定书籍充满热情的评论。不过，这段文字并没有说明这是当时常见的编辑做法。相反，这篇文章告诉我们，目前大多数编辑都发表正面和负面的评论。文中没有任何内容表明这种做法在一代人以前是不同的。
加入收藏
在线答疑
题目来源
