Show Para
8 - 10
Questions 8 to 10 refer to the passage below. For each question, select one answer choice, unless the instructions state otherwise.
Traditionally viewed as the mindless defamations of mutinous teenagers, graffiti has rarely been the subject of serious scholarly inquiry. Fortunately, the discovery of graffiti on the walls at the archeological site of Pompeii has been the impetus for a wholescale
Traditionally viewed as the mindless defamations of mutinous teenagers, graffiti has rarely been the subject of serious scholarly inquiry. Fortunately,the discovery of graffiti on the walls at the archeological site of Pompeii has been the impetus for a whole scale reconsideration of the relevance of graffiti to archeological and historical studies. Yes, graffiti is (and probably always was) mostly done by hormoneaddled teenagers, and yes, the concise nature of graffiti does not lend itself to the type of exegesis to which most academics are inclined. But graffiti,especially graffiti on the walls at a cherished historical site, can lend insight into the powerless voices that would otherwise have been censored by most ancient societies. By examining a culture’s graffiti, we can understand the discontents of that culture in a more organic context—one free of the posturing that is all too pervasive in preserved historical documents. Perhaps graffiti will not tell us the purpose of a law or the mischievous family dramas of ancient governments, but, perhaps more than any document can, it provides us with an unfiltered view of how society at large reacted to forces that were largely out of its control.
Questions 8 to 10 refer to the passage below. For each question, select one answer choice, unless the instructions state otherwise.
Traditionally viewed as the mindless defamations of mutinous teenagers, graffiti has rarely been the subject of serious scholarly inquiry. Fortunately, the discovery of graffiti on the walls at the archeological site of Pompeii has been the impetus for a wholescale
Traditionally viewed as the mindless defamations of mutinous teenagers, graffiti has rarely been the subject of serious scholarly inquiry. Fortunately,the discovery of graffiti on the walls at the archeological site of Pompeii has been the impetus for a whole scale reconsideration of the relevance of graffiti to archeological and historical studies. Yes, graffiti is (and probably always was) mostly done by hormoneaddled teenagers, and yes, the concise nature of graffiti does not lend itself to the type of exegesis to which most academics are inclined. But graffiti,especially graffiti on the walls at a cherished historical site, can lend insight into the powerless voices that would otherwise have been censored by most ancient societies. By examining a culture’s graffiti, we can understand the discontents of that culture in a more organic context—one free of the posturing that is all too pervasive in preserved historical documents. Perhaps graffiti will not tell us the purpose of a law or the mischievous family dramas of ancient governments, but, perhaps more than any document can, it provides us with an unfiltered view of how society at large reacted to forces that were largely out of its control.
Go to Question: