Explanation

A bit convoluted short passage, in which the real gist is: Do we have something that could explain more, that shades light about the gesture ??

A and C could be the tool to reasoning that. B is wrong because is out of scope: we do not care about the proportion of the portraits. We need what could be useful to explain the pose.
_________________

I don't understand why C is correct. Doesn't it imply the man was unsure whether to do the gesture or not?

I feel like that feeling of being unsure doesn't do much to answer the issue.

Actually, We do not know why this convention, after all, became usual. Moreover, we do not have so many information about this.

C says just this: a passage from the time could shade light and useful insights why this convention was so adopted.

Hope this helps.

Regards
_________________

Is A correct because the social implications result from the popularity/rise of the "hand-in" stance? I got C but I didn't think you could assume from what you were given from A that the manual will explain why it became popular

Can someone explain this to me, I do not understand how they got their answer

See my succinct yet clear explanation above

here https://greprepclub.com/forum/a-portrai ... html#p6946

back to this discussion if still, something is unclear to you.

Regards
_________________

Hi,

I do not understand option C.
How can the choice of one person explain the popularity behind the trend.

Any lead would be appreciated.

Thanks.

A portrait type that appeared with relentless frequency in eighteenth-century England is the familiar image of a gentleman poised with one hand inside his partially unbuttoned waistcoat. Standard interpretations of this portrait posture offer observations of correspondence—demonstrating either that it mirrors actual social behavior or that it borrows from classical statuary. Such explanations, however, illuminate neither the source of this curious convention nor the reason for its popularity. It is true that in real life the "hand-in" was a common stance for elite men. Still, there were other ways of comporting the body that did not become winning portrait formulas. And even if the "hand-in' portrait does resemble certain classical statues, what accounts for the adoption of this particular pose?

We do need two examples to show us the popularity, regardless the boring of the behave or WHY is so


Which of the following might provide an explanation for the popularity of hand-in portraits that would satisfy the author of the passage?

❑ An eighteenth-century English etiquette manual discussing the social implications of the "hand-in" stance

Correct. if we discuss the implication probably practice has success

❑ A comprehensive catalogue of eighteenth-century English portraits that showed what proportion of portraits depicted gentlemen in the "hand-in" stance

the proportions do not tell us the success


❑ A passage from an eighteenth-century English novel in which a gentleman considers what stance to adopt when his portrait is painted

if the gentleman adopts it, maybe the stance is relevant and of success


Hope now is more clear.

Ask for further assistance
_________________

Hi, In this we have to see the reason of its popularity like why is it so popular? secondly, source of this convention.

Option A:- Social implications means social understandings? or discussions like that? How that tells if it is so popular
Option B:- More the proportion means more popular right? like for example out of 10 you have 8 of one type it means it s popular right.
Option C:- This one completetely i dont get..gentlemen was thinking which pose to take when his portrait was being taken. How does this contribute to origin/source of convention or popularity? Carcass

Sorry Sir

What is unclear in my explanation just above ??

let me know

Regards
_________________