Which of the following is correct when analyzing a story?
ignore internal inconsistencies
resist the obvious meaning of the work
ignore ambiguities
do not read skeptically
What If I reword it to this
Which of the following is correct when studying a story?
Ignore inner differences
refuse to accept the obvious meaning of the work
ignore doubts
do not read sceptically
*Note that it's not skeptically, it's sceptically*
I would go with the last one. Sceptically means doubtfully. It means unable or unwilling to believe something or completely unconvinced by it.
The answer is - do nto read sceptically.
http://www.answers.com/topic/skeptic
Watch the spelling.
Stephanie had a fantastic experience in Italy last summer. She chose to study abroad at the beginning of her Spring term. Now that she was back from her summer semester in Florence, Italy, she can't stop telling people about her adventures over-seas. She began her summer in a lovely old hotel just off the historic Piazza Della Signoria in the heart of old Florence. The cobble-stone streets and narrow passages between buildings seemed to have hinted at the tumultuous events of hundreds of years of history. Stephanie's favorite pastime after classes had ended for the day was to explore the city. A frequent first stop was at the gelateria near her school. She never tasted before ice cream as silky smooth as she did at that small shop in Italy. Traveling along the narrow streets, ice cream in hand, Stephanie finds soon her way to La Standa. Once a modern department store, the now defunct escalators inside the large rectangular building provided stairway access to the upper market stalls full with fresh produce. The old fashioned market provided lots of practice with her Italian as few vendors were speaking English. Lunch in hand, Stephanie would then find a bench in one of the city's many gardens where she could sit and eat. Memories like this are why many students like Stephanie regard study abroad as one of the best parts of her college experience.
Stephanie had a fantastic experience in Italy last summer. She chose to study abroad at the beginning of her Spring term. Now that she was back from her summer semester in Florence, Italy, she can't stop telling people about her adventures over-seas. She began her summer in a lovely old hotel just off the historic Piazza Della Signoria in the heart of old Florence. The cobble-stone streets and narrow passages between buildings seemed to have hinted at the tumultuous events of hundreds of years of history. Stephanie's favorite pastime after classes had ended for the day was to explore the city. A frequent first stop was at the gelateria near her school. She never tasted before ice cream as silky smooth as she did at that small shop in Italy. Traveling along the narrow streets, ice cream in hand, Stephanie finds soon her way to La Standa. Once a modern department store, the now defunct escalators inside the large rectangular building provided stairway access to the upper market stalls full with fresh produce. The old fashioned market provided lots of practice with her Italian as few vendors were speaking English. Lunch in hand, Stephanie would then find a bench in one of the city's many gardens where she could sit and eat. Memories like this are why many students like Stephanie regard study abroad as one of the best parts of her college experience.
When analyzing a story, it is important to approach it with critical thinking and a discerning eye. Let's evaluate each option and see which one is correct:
1. "Ignore internal inconsistencies": This option is not correct. Internal inconsistencies can provide insights into the story, such as indicating potential symbolism, character development, or thematic elements. Paying attention to internal inconsistencies can enhance the analysis.
2. "Resist the obvious meaning of the work": This option is also not correct. The obvious meaning of a story is typically the starting point for analysis. While it is essential to explore beyond the surface level, considering the obvious meaning helps establish a foundation for further interpretation and analysis.
3. "Ignore ambiguities": This option is not correct. Ambiguities in a story often hold significant meaning and can add depth to the analysis. These uncertainties can give rise to various interpretations, making the analysis more nuanced and thought-provoking.
4. "Do not read skeptically": This option is not correct either. Reading skeptically means evaluating the story critically, questioning its assumptions, and engaging with it in a rigorous and thoughtful manner. Reading skeptically helps identify underlying themes, symbolism, and authorial choices, which are essential for a comprehensive analysis.
In conclusion, none of the provided options are correct when analyzing a story. Instead, it is crucial to pay attention to internal inconsistencies, consider the obvious meaning while exploring beyond it, acknowledge and analyze ambiguities, and approach the reading with a skeptical mindset to delve deeper into the story's layers of meaning.