SAT Reading Comprehension Quiz 2

The new SAT asks reading comprehension questions about main points, details, inferences, vocabulary in context, function, author technique, evidence support, and data analysis from a graph, table, or chart. Reading Comprehension is best improved with repeated practice. Here is a SAT level Reading Comprehension quiz just to help you get a grasp on how the real Reading Comprehension works.

To begin click Next

Question 1: 

As difficult as it may be to comprehend the abstract
shapes and forms of contemporary paintings and
sculptures, it may be even more difficult for most people
today to appreciate the art of ancient times. Though the
individuals who creates these works thousands of years
ago were not, mentally or emotionally, so different from
ourselves, few of us are willing to do what is necessary
to understand the true beauty of ancient masterpieces.
But what, after all, is required of the viewer to
understand the beauty of art, beyond the capacity
to perceive it? Why should ancient art require more
effort to appreciate than contemporary works? The
answer, in a word, is context. In order to obtain any
sense of meaning in a work of art, we must interpret
its depictions using the cultural language of our time.
If we see a painting of a man in a business suit or a
hard hat, we have some idea of what his life is like
and can therefore understand the work emotionally.
Even abstract works are prone to the effects of cultural
context; our aesthetic sensibilities for features like shape
and color are shaped from birth by the colors and shapes
that appear in our environment.
For modern art, these examples might seem obvious,
even trivial. Virtually everyone possesses the necessary
contextual frame to understand the contemporary art of
their own particular culture. When viewing ancient art,
however, most of us fail to realize how very different
the artist’s life was from our own, and we end up seeing
through the wrong set of eyes. Take, for instance, a
very simple visual figure: the straight line. Though
common in today’s man-made world, straight-lines
are rare in nature, so their meaning would be much
different to, say, a cave painter, hose only common
experiences with them might be in tree trunks and the
flat line of the horizon. Color is another example. Our
immediate surroundings are literally saturated with
thousands of colors, but think about how different the
world of color would be to an artist in an ancient forest
and one in the desert. How very different must the
concept of “greenness” be for each, one surrounded by
it constantly, the other viewing it only rarely. Consider
tales of certain Amazon tribes, raised in such thick
jungle that their visual world was at all times limited to
objects a few feet in front of them. When taken out onto
the plains and shown mountains for the first time, such
tribesmen became disoriented and could not understand
why they could not reach out and touch them. As
difficult as it may have been for them to appreciate
our visual world, it would be equally difficult for us to
appreciate theirs.
These differences obviously extend to more complex
visual forms, and, in some cases, we can only speculate
about the metaphorical meanings of the figures in
ancient artwork. We must always keep in mind that art
strives not only to depict, but also to evoke, and, as such,
our understanding is always limited by our knowledge
of the artist’s time and place.

The passage can best be described as a discussion of

Question 2: 

As difficult as it may be to comprehend the abstract
shapes and forms of contemporary paintings and
sculptures, it may be even more difficult for most people
today to appreciate the art of ancient times. Though the
individuals who creates these works thousands of years
ago were not, mentally or emotionally, so different from
ourselves, few of us are willing to do what is necessary
to understand the true beauty of ancient masterpieces.
But what, after all, is required of the viewer to
understand the beauty of art, beyond the capacity
to perceive it? Why should ancient art require more
effort to appreciate than contemporary works? The
answer, in a word, is context. In order to obtain any
sense of meaning in a work of art, we must interpret
its depictions using the cultural language of our time.
If we see a painting of a man in a business suit or a
hard hat, we have some idea of what his life is like
and can therefore understand the work emotionally.
Even abstract works are prone to the effects of cultural
context; our aesthetic sensibilities for features like shape
and color are shaped from birth by the colors and shapes
that appear in our environment.
For modern art, these examples might seem obvious,
even trivial. Virtually everyone possesses the necessary
contextual frame to understand the contemporary art of
their own particular culture. When viewing ancient art,
however, most of us fail to realize how very different
the artist’s life was from our own, and we end up seeing
through the wrong set of eyes. Take, for instance, a
very simple visual figure: the straight line. Though
common in today’s man-made world, straight-lines
are rare in nature, so their meaning would be much
different to, say, a cave painter, hose only common
experiences with them might be in tree trunks and the
flat line of the horizon. Color is another example. Our
immediate surroundings are literally saturated with
thousands of colors, but think about how different the
world of color would be to an artist in an ancient forest
and one in the desert. How very different must the
concept of “greenness” be for each, one surrounded by
it constantly, the other viewing it only rarely. Consider
tales of certain Amazon tribes, raised in such thick
jungle that their visual world was at all times limited to
objects a few feet in front of them. When taken out onto
the plains and shown mountains for the first time, such
tribesmen became disoriented and could not understand
why they could not reach out and touch them. As
difficult as it may have been for them to appreciate
our visual world, it would be equally difficult for us to
appreciate theirs.
These differences obviously extend to more complex
visual forms, and, in some cases, we can only speculate
about the metaphorical meanings of the figures in
ancient artwork. We must always keep in mind that art
strives not only to depict, but also to evoke, and, as such,
our understanding is always limited by our knowledge
of the artist’s time and place.

As it is used in line 10, “capacity” most nearly means

Question 3: 

As difficult as it may be to comprehend the abstract
shapes and forms of contemporary paintings and
sculptures, it may be even more difficult for most people
today to appreciate the art of ancient times. Though the
individuals who creates these works thousands of years
ago were not, mentally or emotionally, so different from
ourselves, few of us are willing to do what is necessary
to understand the true beauty of ancient masterpieces.
But what, after all, is required of the viewer to
understand the beauty of art, beyond the capacity
to perceive it? Why should ancient art require more
effort to appreciate than contemporary works? The
answer, in a word, is context. In order to obtain any
sense of meaning in a work of art, we must interpret
its depictions using the cultural language of our time.
If we see a painting of a man in a business suit or a
hard hat, we have some idea of what his life is like
and can therefore understand the work emotionally.
Even abstract works are prone to the effects of cultural
context; our aesthetic sensibilities for features like shape
and color are shaped from birth by the colors and shapes
that appear in our environment.
For modern art, these examples might seem obvious,
even trivial. Virtually everyone possesses the necessary
contextual frame to understand the contemporary art of
their own particular culture. When viewing ancient art,
however, most of us fail to realize how very different
the artist’s life was from our own, and we end up seeing
through the wrong set of eyes. Take, for instance, a
very simple visual figure: the straight line. Though
common in today’s man-made world, straight-lines
are rare in nature, so their meaning would be much
different to, say, a cave painter, hose only common
experiences with them might be in tree trunks and the
flat line of the horizon. Color is another example. Our
immediate surroundings are literally saturated with
thousands of colors, but think about how different the
world of color would be to an artist in an ancient forest
and one in the desert. How very different must the
concept of “greenness” be for each, one surrounded by
it constantly, the other viewing it only rarely. Consider
tales of certain Amazon tribes, raised in such thick
jungle that their visual world was at all times limited to
objects a few feet in front of them. When taken out onto
the plains and shown mountains for the first time, such
tribesmen became disoriented and could not understand
why they could not reach out and touch them. As
difficult as it may have been for them to appreciate
our visual world, it would be equally difficult for us to
appreciate theirs.
These differences obviously extend to more complex
visual forms, and, in some cases, we can only speculate
about the metaphorical meanings of the figures in
ancient artwork. We must always keep in mind that art
strives not only to depict, but also to evoke, and, as such,
our understanding is always limited by our knowledge
of the artist’s time and place.

The “tales of certain Amazon tribes” (line 42) most likely refers to

Question 4: 

As difficult as it may be to comprehend the abstract
shapes and forms of contemporary paintings and
sculptures, it may be even more difficult for most people
today to appreciate the art of ancient times. Though the
individuals who creates these works thousands of years
ago were not, mentally or emotionally, so different from
ourselves, few of us are willing to do what is necessary
to understand the true beauty of ancient masterpieces.
But what, after all, is required of the viewer to
understand the beauty of art, beyond the capacity
to perceive it? Why should ancient art require more
effort to appreciate than contemporary works? The
answer, in a word, is context. In order to obtain any
sense of meaning in a work of art, we must interpret
its depictions using the cultural language of our time.
If we see a painting of a man in a business suit or a
hard hat, we have some idea of what his life is like
and can therefore understand the work emotionally.
Even abstract works are prone to the effects of cultural
context; our aesthetic sensibilities for features like shape
and color are shaped from birth by the colors and shapes
that appear in our environment.
For modern art, these examples might seem obvious,
even trivial. Virtually everyone possesses the necessary
contextual frame to understand the contemporary art of
their own particular culture. When viewing ancient art,
however, most of us fail to realize how very different
the artist’s life was from our own, and we end up seeing
through the wrong set of eyes. Take, for instance, a
very simple visual figure: the straight line. Though
common in today’s man-made world, straight-lines
are rare in nature, so their meaning would be much
different to, say, a cave painter, hose only common
experiences with them might be in tree trunks and the
flat line of the horizon. Color is another example. Our
immediate surroundings are literally saturated with
thousands of colors, but think about how different the
world of color would be to an artist in an ancient forest
and one in the desert. How very different must the
concept of “greenness” be for each, one surrounded by
it constantly, the other viewing it only rarely. Consider
tales of certain Amazon tribes, raised in such thick
jungle that their visual world was at all times limited to
objects a few feet in front of them. When taken out onto
the plains and shown mountains for the first time, such
tribesmen became disoriented and could not understand
why they could not reach out and touch them. As
difficult as it may have been for them to appreciate
our visual world, it would be equally difficult for us to
appreciate theirs.
These differences obviously extend to more complex
visual forms, and, in some cases, we can only speculate
about the metaphorical meanings of the figures in
ancient artwork. We must always keep in mind that art
strives not only to depict, but also to evoke, and, as such,
our understanding is always limited by our knowledge
of the artist’s time and place.

The author implies that many people do not fully appreciate ancient art because they

Question 5: 

As difficult as it may be to comprehend the abstract
shapes and forms of contemporary paintings and
sculptures, it may be even more difficult for most people
today to appreciate the art of ancient times. Though the
individuals who creates these works thousands of years
ago were not, mentally or emotionally, so different from
ourselves, few of us are willing to do what is necessary
to understand the true beauty of ancient masterpieces.
But what, after all, is required of the viewer to
understand the beauty of art, beyond the capacity
to perceive it? Why should ancient art require more
effort to appreciate than contemporary works? The
answer, in a word, is context. In order to obtain any
sense of meaning in a work of art, we must interpret
its depictions using the cultural language of our time.
If we see a painting of a man in a business suit or a
hard hat, we have some idea of what his life is like
and can therefore understand the work emotionally.
Even abstract works are prone to the effects of cultural
context; our aesthetic sensibilities for features like shape
and color are shaped from birth by the colors and shapes
that appear in our environment.
For modern art, these examples might seem obvious,
even trivial. Virtually everyone possesses the necessary
contextual frame to understand the contemporary art of
their own particular culture. When viewing ancient art,
however, most of us fail to realize how very different
the artist’s life was from our own, and we end up seeing
through the wrong set of eyes. Take, for instance, a
very simple visual figure: the straight line. Though
common in today’s man-made world, straight-lines
are rare in nature, so their meaning would be much
different to, say, a cave painter, hose only common
experiences with them might be in tree trunks and the
flat line of the horizon. Color is another example. Our
immediate surroundings are literally saturated with
thousands of colors, but think about how different the
world of color would be to an artist in an ancient forest
and one in the desert. How very different must the
concept of “greenness” be for each, one surrounded by
it constantly, the other viewing it only rarely. Consider
tales of certain Amazon tribes, raised in such thick
jungle that their visual world was at all times limited to
objects a few feet in front of them. When taken out onto
the plains and shown mountains for the first time, such
tribesmen became disoriented and could not understand
why they could not reach out and touch them. As
difficult as it may have been for them to appreciate
our visual world, it would be equally difficult for us to
appreciate theirs.
These differences obviously extend to more complex
visual forms, and, in some cases, we can only speculate
about the metaphorical meanings of the figures in
ancient artwork. We must always keep in mind that art
strives not only to depict, but also to evoke, and, as such,
our understanding is always limited by our knowledge
of the artist’s time and place.

The author’s opinion of the general public could most accurately be described as

Question 6: 

As difficult as it may be to comprehend the abstract
shapes and forms of contemporary paintings and
sculptures, it may be even more difficult for most people
today to appreciate the art of ancient times. Though the
individuals who creates these works thousands of years
ago were not, mentally or emotionally, so different from
ourselves, few of us are willing to do what is necessary
to understand the true beauty of ancient masterpieces.
But what, after all, is required of the viewer to
understand the beauty of art, beyond the capacity
to perceive it? Why should ancient art require more
effort to appreciate than contemporary works? The
answer, in a word, is context. In order to obtain any
sense of meaning in a work of art, we must interpret
its depictions using the cultural language of our time.
If we see a painting of a man in a business suit or a
hard hat, we have some idea of what his life is like
and can therefore understand the work emotionally.
Even abstract works are prone to the effects of cultural
context; our aesthetic sensibilities for features like shape
and color are shaped from birth by the colors and shapes
that appear in our environment.
For modern art, these examples might seem obvious,
even trivial. Virtually everyone possesses the necessary
contextual frame to understand the contemporary art of
their own particular culture. When viewing ancient art,
however, most of us fail to realize how very different
the artist’s life was from our own, and we end up seeing
through the wrong set of eyes. Take, for instance, a
very simple visual figure: the straight line. Though
common in today’s man-made world, straight-lines
are rare in nature, so their meaning would be much
different to, say, a cave painter, hose only common
experiences with them might be in tree trunks and the
flat line of the horizon. Color is another example. Our
immediate surroundings are literally saturated with
thousands of colors, but think about how different the
world of color would be to an artist in an ancient forest
and one in the desert. How very different must the
concept of “greenness” be for each, one surrounded by
it constantly, the other viewing it only rarely. Consider
tales of certain Amazon tribes, raised in such thick
jungle that their visual world was at all times limited to
objects a few feet in front of them. When taken out onto
the plains and shown mountains for the first time, such
tribesmen became disoriented and could not understand
why they could not reach out and touch them. As
difficult as it may have been for them to appreciate
our visual world, it would be equally difficult for us to
appreciate theirs.
These differences obviously extend to more complex
visual forms, and, in some cases, we can only speculate
about the metaphorical meanings of the figures in
ancient artwork. We must always keep in mind that art
strives not only to depict, but also to evoke, and, as such,
our understanding is always limited by our knowledge
of the artist’s time and place.

In the final paragraph (lines 51-57), the author’s assumption is that


You have answered all the questions in the quiz. Press Submit to view your score



Login