题目信息
There are two theories that have been used to
explain ancient and modern tragedy. Neither quite
explains the complexity of the tragic process or the
tragic hero, but each explains important elements
of tragedy, and, because their conclusions are
contradictory, they represent extreme views. The first
theory states that all tragedy exhibits the workings
of external fate. Of course, the overwhelming
majority of tragedies do leave us with a sense of the
supremacy of impersonal power and of the limitation
of human effort. But this theory of tragedy is an
oversimplification, primarily because it confuses
the tragic condition with the tragic process: the
theory does not acknowledge that fate, in a tragedy,
normally becomes external to the hero only after
the tragic process has been set in motion. Fate, as
conceived in ancient Greek tragedy, is the internal
balancing condition of life. It appears as external
only after it has been violated, just as justice is an
internal quality of an honest person, but the external
antagonist of the criminal. Secondarily, this theory
of tragedy does not distinguish tragedy from irony.
Irony does not need an exceptional central figure:
as a rule, the more ignoble the hero the sharper the
irony, when irony alone is the objective. It is heroism
that creates the splendor and exhilaration that is
unique to tragedy. The tragic hero normally has an
extraordinary, often a nearly divine, destiny almost
within grasp, and the glory ofthat original destiny
never quite fades out of the tragedy.
The second theory of tragedy states that the
act that sets the tragic process in motion must be
primarily a violation of moral law, whether human
or divine; in short, that the tragic hero must have a
flaw that has an essential connection with sin. Again
it is true that the great majority of tragic heroes do
possess hubris, or a proud and passionate mind
that seems to make the hero's downfall morally
explicable. But such hubris is only the precipitating
agent of catastrophe, just as in comedy the cause
of the happy ending is usually some act of humility,
often performed by a noble character who is meanly
disguised.
explain ancient and modern tragedy. Neither quite
explains the complexity of the tragic process or the
tragic hero, but each explains important elements
of tragedy, and, because their conclusions are
contradictory, they represent extreme views. The first
theory states that all tragedy exhibits the workings
of external fate. Of course, the overwhelming
majority of tragedies do leave us with a sense of the
supremacy of impersonal power and of the limitation
of human effort. But this theory of tragedy is an
oversimplification, primarily because it confuses
the tragic condition with the tragic process: the
theory does not acknowledge that fate, in a tragedy,
normally becomes external to the hero only after
the tragic process has been set in motion. Fate, as
conceived in ancient Greek tragedy, is the internal
balancing condition of life. It appears as external
only after it has been violated, just as justice is an
internal quality of an honest person, but the external
antagonist of the criminal. Secondarily, this theory
of tragedy does not distinguish tragedy from irony.
Irony does not need an exceptional central figure:
as a rule, the more ignoble the hero the sharper the
irony, when irony alone is the objective. It is heroism
that creates the splendor and exhilaration that is
unique to tragedy. The tragic hero normally has an
extraordinary, often a nearly divine, destiny almost
within grasp, and the glory of
never quite fades out of the tragedy.
The second theory of tragedy states that the
act that sets the tragic process in motion must be
primarily a violation of moral law, whether human
or divine; in short, that the tragic hero must have a
flaw that has an essential connection with sin. Again
it is true that the great majority of tragic heroes do
possess hubris, or a proud and passionate mind
that seems to make the hero's downfall morally
explicable. But such hubris is only the precipitating
agent of catastrophe, just as in comedy the cause
of the happy ending is usually some act of humility,
often performed by a noble character who is meanly
disguised.
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：
A:compare and criticize two theories of tragedy
答案.A
题目大意：这篇短文的主要目的是
本文的主要目的是比较和批判两种悲剧理论的假设
A.两种悲剧理论的比较与批判
B.发展新的悲剧理论。这篇文章没有发展出新的悲剧理论。
C.总结悲剧的主题内容。虽然这篇文章概括了悲剧的主题内容，但它只是作为对所讨论的两种悲剧理论进行批判性分析的一种手段。
D.拒绝一种悲剧理论，提供另一种理论来代替它。这篇文章并没有提出一个新的悲剧理论；它只是考虑了两个现存的理论。
E.区分悲剧与讽刺。这篇文章区分了悲剧和反讽；它这样做只是为了服务于更大的分析，这是文章的主要重点。
题目大意：这篇短文的主要目的是
本文的主要目的是比较和批判两种悲剧理论的假设
A.两种悲剧理论的比较与批判
B.发展新的悲剧理论。这篇文章没有发展出新的悲剧理论。
C.总结悲剧的主题内容。虽然这篇文章概括了悲剧的主题内容，但它只是作为对所讨论的两种悲剧理论进行批判性分析的一种手段。
D.拒绝一种悲剧理论，提供另一种理论来代替它。这篇文章并没有提出一个新的悲剧理论；它只是考虑了两个现存的理论。
E.区分悲剧与讽刺。这篇文章区分了悲剧和反讽；它这样做只是为了服务于更大的分析，这是文章的主要重点。
加入收藏
在线答疑
题目来源
