GMAT Section 3: Verbal Ability v1.0 (GMAT Section 3)

Coca-Cola, which sold 10 billion cases of soft drinks in 1992, now finds itself asking, where will sales of the next 10 billion cases come from? The answer lies overseas, where income levels and appetites for Western products are at an all time high.
Often, the company that gets into a foreign market earliest dominates that country's market. Coke patriarch Robert Woodruff realized this and unleashed a brilliant ploy to make Coke the early bird in many of the major foreign markets. At the height of World War II, Woodruff proclaimed, "Wherever American boys were fighting, they'd be able to get a Coke." By the time Pepsi tried to make its first international pitch in the 1950s, Coke had established its brand name along with a powerful distribution network.
During the last 40 years, many new markets have emerged. In order to tap into these opportunities, both coke and Pepsi have attempted to find ways to cut through the red tape that thwarts their efforts to conduct business in these new regions.
One key maneuver in the soda wars occurred in 1972, when Pepsi signed an agreement with the Soviet Union that made it the first Western product to be sold to consumers in Russia. This landmark agreement gave Pepsi the upper hand. At present, Pepsi has 23 plants in the former Soviet Union and is the leader in the soft-drink industry in Russia. It outsells Coca-Cola by a ratio of 6 to 1 and is seen there as a local brand, similar to Coke"™s homegrown reputation in Japan.
However, Pepsi has also encountered some obstacles. An expected increase in brand loyalty for Pepsi subsequent to its advertising blitz in Russia has not materialized; even though Pepsi produced commercials tailored to the Russian market and sponsored televised concerts.
Some analysts believe that Pepsi"™s domination of the Russian market has more to do with pricing. While Pepsi sells for 250 Rubles (about 25 cents) a bottle,
Coca-Cola sells for 450 Rubles. Likewise, Pepsi sells their 2 liter economy bottle for 1,300 Rubles, while Coca-Cola"™s 1.5 liters is marketed at 1,800 rubles. On the other hand, Coca-Cola only made its first inroads into Russia 2 years ago. What's more, although Coca-Cola's bottle and label give it a high-class image,
Russians do not perceive Coca-Cola as a premium brand in the Russian market. Consequently, it has so far been unable to capture a market share.
The primary purpose of the passage is to

With the proliferation of electronic technologies in the latter part of the twentieth century, many aspects of cultural practice have been redefined. The eradication of physical boundaries that limit discourse and information access has had profound effects upon the manner in which we conduct democracy. Yet, opinions strongly differ over whether or not the growth of electronic networks will result in expanded democracy. On one side of the debate are anti-utopians who fear that with the intrusion of the Internet into many facets of life, personal freedom will be impeded and the existing rift between the "haves" and "have-nots" in society will grow. On the other side, many 'cyber-utopians' believe that new technologies can eliminate the democracy of elected representatives with which so many people are dissatisfied. The Internet, they say, will allow for a true participatory democracy in which citizens can govern themselves without the interference of bureaucrats and legislators.
Neither of these theories by themselves can fully address the role of democracy in the age of information. As debates about censorship and encryption have shown, government regulation of the Internet can result in violations of the basic rights of speech set forth in the constitution of the United States. Yet, groups that preach "˜Big Brother"™ theories of paranoia tend to neglect the fact that new technologies can help balance the injustices of traditional power found in a centralized government. At the same time, the likelihood of doing away with the present system of democracy in favor of complete and pure self-governance seems impossible and likely undesirable.
Both arguments about the future of the way in which discourse will occur highlight the inherent relationship between communication and democracy. Perhaps a more useful model for the study of this dynamic can be found in the model of the public sphere proposed by Jorgen Habermas. In this realm, free and diverse equals come together to deliberate and discuss pertinent issues without the impediment of external coercion. The ensuing dialogue transpires in a profoundly democratic forum. The dispensing of traditional hierarchies that occurs on the Internet appears to make possible the type of categories necessary for Habermas "˜ideal speech situation to occur.
However, postmodern critics indicate that the autonomous individual no longer exists in a world where our identities are constructed as much for us as by us. And indeed, much of the postmodern notion of self seems to fit closely with reconfigurations of the subject brought on by electronic technologies. The question that arises then is how might the reconfiguration of communication enabled by the Internet work to create a new form of cyber-democracy"™ that better represents citizen"™s interests?
According to the passage, the 'cyber-utopians' mentioned in the passage would most likely be in favor of which of the following innovations?

With the proliferation of electronic technologies in the latter part of the twentieth century, many aspects of cultural practice have been redefined. The eradication of physical boundaries that limit discourse and information access has had profound effects upon the manner in which we conduct democracy. Yet, opinions strongly differ over whether or not the growth of electronic networks will result in expanded democracy. On one side of the debate are anti-utopians who fear that with the intrusion of the Internet into many facets of life, personal freedom will be impeded and the existing rift between the "haves" and "have-nots" in society will grow. On the other side, many 'cyber-utopians' believe that new technologies can eliminate the democracy of elected representatives with which so many people are dissatisfied. The Internet, they say, will allow for a true participatory democracy in which citizens can govern themselves without the interference of bureaucrats and legislators.
Neither of these theories by themselves can fully address the role of democracy in the age of information. As debates about censorship and encryption have shown, government regulation of the Internet can result in violations of the basic rights of speech set forth in the constitution of the United States. Yet, groups that preach "˜Big Brother"™ theories of paranoia tend to neglect the fact that new technologies can help balance the injustices of traditional power found in a centralized government. At the same time, the likelihood of doing away with the present system of democracy in favor of complete and pure self-governance seems impossible and likely undesirable.
Both arguments about the future of the way in which discourse will occur highlight the inherent relationship between communication and democracy. Perhaps a more useful model for the study of this dynamic can be found in the model of the public sphere proposed by Jorgen Habermas. In this realm, free and diverse equals come together to deliberate and discuss pertinent issues without the impediment of external coercion. The ensuing dialogue transpires in a profoundly democratic forum. The dispensing of traditional hierarchies that occurs on the Internet appears to make possible the type of categories necessary for Habermas "˜ideal speech situation to occur.
However, postmodern critics indicate that the autonomous individual no longer exists in a world where our identities are constructed as much for us as by us. And indeed, much of the postmodern notion of self seems to fit closely with reconfigurations of the subject brought on by electronic technologies. The question that arises then is how might the reconfiguration of communication enabled by the Internet work to create a new form of cyber-democracy"™ that better represents citizen"™s interests?
The passage supports which of the following statements about government regulation of the Internet?

With the proliferation of electronic technologies in the latter part of the twentieth century, many aspects of cultural practice have been redefined. The eradication of physical boundaries that limit discourse and information access has had profound effects upon the manner in which we conduct democracy. Yet, opinions strongly differ over whether or not the growth of electronic networks will result in expanded democracy. On one side of the debate are anti-utopians who fear that with the intrusion of the Internet into many facets of life, personal freedom will be impeded and the existing rift between the "haves" and "have-nots" in society will grow. On the other side, many 'cyber-utopians' believe that new technologies can eliminate the democracy of elected representatives with which so many people are dissatisfied. The Internet, they say, will allow for a true participatory democracy in which citizens can govern themselves without the interference of bureaucrats and legislators.
Neither of these theories by themselves can fully address the role of democracy in the age of information. As debates about censorship and encryption have shown, government regulation of the Internet can result in violations of the basic rights of speech set forth in the constitution of the United States. Yet, groups that preach "˜Big Brother"™ theories of paranoia tend to neglect the fact that new technologies can help balance the injustices of traditional power found in a centralized government. At the same time, the likelihood of doing away with the present system of democracy in favor of complete and pure self-governance seems impossible and likely undesirable.
Both arguments about the future of the way in which discourse will occur highlight the inherent relationship between communication and democracy. Perhaps a more useful model for the study of this dynamic can be found in the model of the public sphere proposed by Jorgen Habermas. In this realm, free and diverse equals come together to deliberate and discuss pertinent issues without the impediment of external coercion. The ensuing dialogue transpires in a profoundly democratic forum. The dispensing of traditional hierarchies that occurs on the Internet appears to make possible the type of categories necessary for Habermas "˜ideal speech situation to occur.
However, postmodern critics indicate that the autonomous individual no longer exists in a world where our identities are constructed as much for us as by us. And indeed, much of the postmodern notion of self seems to fit closely with reconfigurations of the subject brought on by electronic technologies. The question that arises then is how might the reconfiguration of communication enabled by the Internet work to create a new form of cyber-democracy"™ that better represents citizen"™s interests?
The author is primarily concerned with

With the proliferation of electronic technologies in the latter part of the twentieth century, many aspects of cultural practice have been redefined. The eradication of physical boundaries that limit discourse and information access has had profound effects upon the manner in which we conduct democracy. Yet, opinions strongly differ over whether or not the growth of electronic networks will result in expanded democracy. On one side of the debate are anti-utopians who fear that with the intrusion of the Internet into many facets of life, personal freedom will be impeded and the existing rift between the "haves" and "have-nots" in society will grow. On the other side, many 'cyber-utopians' believe that new technologies can eliminate the democracy of elected representatives with which so many people are dissatisfied. The Internet, they say, will allow for a true participatory democracy in which citizens can govern themselves without the interference of bureaucrats and legislators.
Neither of these theories by themselves can fully address the role of democracy in the age of information. As debates about censorship and encryption have shown, government regulation of the Internet can result in violations of the basic rights of speech set forth in the constitution of the United States. Yet, groups that preach "˜Big Brother"™ theories of paranoia tend to neglect the fact that new technologies can help balance the injustices of traditional power found in a centralized government. At the same time, the likelihood of doing away with the present system of democracy in favor of complete and pure self-governance seems impossible and likely undesirable.
Both arguments about the future of the way in which discourse will occur highlight the inherent relationship between communication and democracy. Perhaps a more useful model for the study of this dynamic can be found in the model of the public sphere proposed by Jorgen Habermas. In this realm, free and diverse equals come together to deliberate and discuss pertinent issues without the impediment of external coercion. The ensuing dialogue transpires in a profoundly democratic forum. The dispensing of traditional hierarchies that occurs on the Internet appears to make possible the type of categories necessary for Habermas "˜ideal speech situation to occur.
However, postmodern critics indicate that the autonomous individual no longer exists in a world where our identities are constructed as much for us as by us. And indeed, much of the postmodern notion of self seems to fit closely with reconfigurations of the subject brought on by electronic technologies. The question that arises then is how might the reconfiguration of communication enabled by the Internet work to create a new form of cyber-democracy"™ that better represents citizen"™s interests?
According to the passage, which of the following is considered by postmodern critics to be a threat to the notion of self?

Men are primarily and secondarily socialized into believing certain characteristics are definitive in determining their masculinity. These characteristics range from playing violently to not crying when they are injured. The socialization of masculinity in our society begins as early as the first stages of infancy, with awareness of adult gender role differences being internalized by children as young as two years old.
Studies show that advertising imagery equates masculinity with violence by portraying the trait of aggression as instrumental to establishing their masculinity. Lee
Bowker, who researched the influence of advertisements on youth, asserts that toy advertisements featuring only boys depict aggressive behavior and that the aggressive behavior produces positive consequences more often than negative.
Bowker also looked at commercials with boys that contain references to domination. His results indicated that 68.6% of the commercials positioned toward boys contain incidents of verbal and physical aggression. However, there were no cross gender displays of aggressive behavior. Interestingly, not one single-sex commercial featuring girls showed any act of aggression. Bowker"™s research helps explain that it is not just the reinforcement of a child"™s close caretakers that lends legitimacy to aggressive masculine tendencies but society as a whole, using the medium of television.
William Pollack, a Harvard clinical psychologist, talks about how males have been put in a "gender straightjacket" that leads to anger, despair and often violence.
Pollack states that society asks men to put a whole range of feelings and emotions behind a mask and shames them if they display any emotion. Pollack contends that boys are "˜shame phobic"™, even killing, in extreme cases, to avoid dishonor. It appears that the standard defined by society allows men to express their emotion only through anger. Ironically, though these rigid stereotypes of what it means to be a man have been inculcated from an early age, men are often criticized for being one-dimensional in their behavior and emotions.
Women often verbalize a desire for males to be sensitive and express their emotions. But male insensitivity is the culmination of a societal indoctrination begun at birth. Realistically, men are in a damned if they do, damned if they don"™t situation. If they fail to show their emotions, they are berated for being detached from the essence of what constitutes a human being. On the other hand, if a male decides to expose his emotions, he is often branded effeminate and regarded as inferior to other males who stick closer to their gender"™s traditional doctrine.
According to the passage, the television commercials examined by Bowker

Men are primarily and secondarily socialized into believing certain characteristics are definitive in determining their masculinity. These characteristics range from playing violently to not crying when they are injured. The socialization of masculinity in our society begins as early as the first stages of infancy, with awareness of adult gender role differences being internalized by children as young as two years old.
Studies show that advertising imagery equates masculinity with violence by portraying the trait of aggression as instrumental to establishing their masculinity. Lee
Bowker, who researched the influence of advertisements on youth, asserts that toy advertisements featuring only boys depict aggressive behavior and that the aggressive behavior produces positive consequences more often than negative.
Bowker also looked at commercials with boys that contain references to domination. His results indicated that 68.6% of the commercials positioned toward boys contain incidents of verbal and physical aggression. However, there were no cross gender displays of aggressive behavior. Interestingly, not one single-sex commercial featuring girls showed any act of aggression. Bowker"™s research helps explain that it is not just the reinforcement of a child"™s close caretakers that lends legitimacy to aggressive masculine tendencies but society as a whole, using the medium of television.
William Pollack, a Harvard clinical psychologist, talks about how males have been put in a "gender straightjacket" that leads to anger, despair and often violence.
Pollack states that society asks men to put a whole range of feelings and emotions behind a mask and shames them if they display any emotion. Pollack contends that boys are "˜shame phobic"™, even killing, in extreme cases, to avoid dishonor. It appears that the standard defined by society allows men to express their emotion only through anger. Ironically, though these rigid stereotypes of what it means to be a man have been inculcated from an early age, men are often criticized for being one-dimensional in their behavior and emotions.
Women often verbalize a desire for males to be sensitive and express their emotions. But male insensitivity is the culmination of a societal indoctrination begun at birth. Realistically, men are in a damned if they do, damned if they don"™t situation. If they fail to show their emotions, they are berated for being detached from the essence of what constitutes a human being. On the other hand, if a male decides to expose his emotions, he is often branded effeminate and regarded as inferior to other males who stick closer to their gender"™s traditional doctrine.
According to Pollack, one of the reasons for male violence is that

Men are primarily and secondarily socialized into believing certain characteristics are definitive in determining their masculinity. These characteristics range from playing violently to not crying when they are injured. The socialization of masculinity in our society begins as early as the first stages of infancy, with awareness of adult gender role differences being internalized by children as young as two years old.
Studies show that advertising imagery equates masculinity with violence by portraying the trait of aggression as instrumental to establishing their masculinity. Lee
Bowker, who researched the influence of advertisements on youth, asserts that toy advertisements featuring only boys depict aggressive behavior and that the aggressive behavior produces positive consequences more often than negative.
Bowker also looked at commercials with boys that contain references to domination. His results indicated that 68.6% of the commercials positioned toward boys contain incidents of verbal and physical aggression. However, there were no cross gender displays of aggressive behavior. Interestingly, not one single-sex commercial featuring girls showed any act of aggression. Bowker"™s research helps explain that it is not just the reinforcement of a child"™s close caretakers that lends legitimacy to aggressive masculine tendencies but society as a whole, using the medium of television.
William Pollack, a Harvard clinical psychologist, talks about how males have been put in a "gender straightjacket" that leads to anger, despair and often violence.
Pollack states that society asks men to put a whole range of feelings and emotions behind a mask and shames them if they display any emotion. Pollack contends that boys are "˜shame phobic"™, even killing, in extreme cases, to avoid dishonor. It appears that the standard defined by society allows men to express their emotion only through anger. Ironically, though these rigid stereotypes of what it means to be a man have been inculcated from an early age, men are often criticized for being one-dimensional in their behavior and emotions.
Women often verbalize a desire for males to be sensitive and express their emotions. But male insensitivity is the culmination of a societal indoctrination begun at birth. Realistically, men are in a damned if they do, damned if they don"™t situation. If they fail to show their emotions, they are berated for being detached from the essence of what constitutes a human being. On the other hand, if a male decides to expose his emotions, he is often branded effeminate and regarded as inferior to other males who stick closer to their gender"™s traditional doctrine.
The passage suggests that, when compared with television advertisement featuring boys, advertisements that had only girls were found

Juror anonymity was unknown to American common law and jurisprudence in the country"™s first two centuries. Anonymity was first employed in federal prosecutions of organized crime in New York in the 1980's. Although anonymous juries are unusual since they are typically only empanelled in organized-crime cases, its use has spread more recently to widely publicized cases, such as the federal prosecution of police officers accused of beating Rodney King and the trial of those accused of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
In these cases, attorneys selected a jury from a panel of prospective jurors whose names, addresses, ethnic backgrounds and religious affiliations remained unknown to either side. This unorthodox procedure, designed to protect jurors from outside influence and the fear of retaliation, has occasionally been employed in
New York federal courts since the trial of drug kingpin Leroy "Nicky" Barnes. Despite apparent benefits, critics assail anonymous juries on the grounds that they are an infringement of the sixth amendment guarantee of an impartial jury and because they present a serious and unnecessary erosion of the presumption of innocence.
Since many attorneys believe trials are frequently won or lost during jury selection, any procedure diminishing the role of counsel in the procedure necessitates close scrutiny and criticism. Opponents of anonymous juries argue that the procedure restricts meaningful voir dire, (questioning of the jury panel), and thereby undermines the defendant's sixth amendment right to an impartial jury. Critics also claim that jurors interpret their anonymity as proof of the defendant's criminal proclivity, thereby subverting the presumption of innocence.
However, consistent with due process and the sixth amendment, the trial judge may refuse to ask prospective jurors any questions not reasonably calculated to expose biases or prejudices relevant to the case. Although addresses and group affiliations may indicate significant potential for bias, attorneys do not have an unfettered right to this information in every circumstance. Denying access to these facts may indeed constrain an attorney's ability to assemble an ideal jury, but it violates no constitutional right
The primary purpose of the passage is to

Juror anonymity was unknown to American common law and jurisprudence in the country"™s first two centuries. Anonymity was first employed in federal prosecutions of organized crime in New York in the 1980's. Although anonymous juries are unusual since they are typically only empanelled in organized-crime cases, its use has spread more recently to widely publicized cases, such as the federal prosecution of police officers accused of beating Rodney King and the trial of those accused of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
In these cases, attorneys selected a jury from a panel of prospective jurors whose names, addresses, ethnic backgrounds and religious affiliations remained unknown to either side. This unorthodox procedure, designed to protect jurors from outside influence and the fear of retaliation, has occasionally been employed in
New York federal courts since the trial of drug kingpin Leroy "Nicky" Barnes. Despite apparent benefits, critics assail anonymous juries on the grounds that they are an infringement of the sixth amendment guarantee of an impartial jury and because they present a serious and unnecessary erosion of the presumption of innocence.
Since many attorneys believe trials are frequently won or lost during jury selection, any procedure diminishing the role of counsel in the procedure necessitates close scrutiny and criticism. Opponents of anonymous juries argue that the procedure restricts meaningful voir dire, (questioning of the jury panel), and thereby undermines the defendant's sixth amendment right to an impartial jury. Critics also claim that jurors interpret their anonymity as proof of the defendant's criminal proclivity, thereby subverting the presumption of innocence.
However, consistent with due process and the sixth amendment, the trial judge may refuse to ask prospective jurors any questions not reasonably calculated to expose biases or prejudices relevant to the case. Although addresses and group affiliations may indicate significant potential for bias, attorneys do not have an unfettered right to this information in every circumstance. Denying access to these facts may indeed constrain an attorney's ability to assemble an ideal jury, but it violates no constitutional right
It can be inferred from the passage that a jurors ethnic background and religious affiliation

Juror anonymity was unknown to American common law and jurisprudence in the country"™s first two centuries. Anonymity was first employed in federal prosecutions of organized crime in New York in the 1980's. Although anonymous juries are unusual since they are typically only empanelled in organized-crime cases, its use has spread more recently to widely publicized cases, such as the federal prosecution of police officers accused of beating Rodney King and the trial of those accused of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
In these cases, attorneys selected a jury from a panel of prospective jurors whose names, addresses, ethnic backgrounds and religious affiliations remained unknown to either side. This unorthodox procedure, designed to protect jurors from outside influence and the fear of retaliation, has occasionally been employed in
New York federal courts since the trial of drug kingpin Leroy "Nicky" Barnes. Despite apparent benefits, critics assail anonymous juries on the grounds that they are an infringement of the sixth amendment guarantee of an impartial jury and because they present a serious and unnecessary erosion of the presumption of innocence.
Since many attorneys believe trials are frequently won or lost during jury selection, any procedure diminishing the role of counsel in the procedure necessitates close scrutiny and criticism. Opponents of anonymous juries argue that the procedure restricts meaningful voir dire, (questioning of the jury panel), and thereby undermines the defendant's sixth amendment right to an impartial jury. Critics also claim that jurors interpret their anonymity as proof of the defendant's criminal proclivity, thereby subverting the presumption of innocence.
However, consistent with due process and the sixth amendment, the trial judge may refuse to ask prospective jurors any questions not reasonably calculated to expose biases or prejudices relevant to the case. Although addresses and group affiliations may indicate significant potential for bias, attorneys do not have an unfettered right to this information in every circumstance. Denying access to these facts may indeed constrain an attorney's ability to assemble an ideal jury, but it violates no constitutional right
One function of the fourth paragraph of the passage is to

Alexander Calder was one of the most innovative and original American artists of the twentieth century. Calder arrived in Paris in 1926 and devoted himself to a innovative project comprised of animals made out of wire, scraps of cloth, wood, cork, labels, bits of scrap metal and pieces of rubber that he called the Circus.
During his performances, Calder invented ways to simulate the flight of birds: "These are little bits of white paper, with a hole and slight weight on each one, which flutter down several variously coiled thin steel wires which I jiggle so that they flutter down like doves." The Circus was the laboratory of Calder"™s work; in it he experimented with new formulas and techniques. By 1930, Calder's Circus had developed into one of the real successes of the Montparnasse art world attracting the attention of such renowned artists as Fernand Leger and Joan Micro. Encouragement from the upper echelons of the Parisian art scene undoubtedly led him to try more serious experiments in wire sculptures. Calder eventually becoming interested in the movement of objects, some of which he motorized. In 1933,
Calder completed Object with Red Discs, a sculpture he described as a two-meter rod with a heavy sphere, suspended from the apex of a wire, giving it a cantilever effect. It had five thin aluminum discs projected at right angels from five wires, held in position by a spherical counterweight. With this new creation, the idea of the mobile was born. In creating a work named Constellations in 1943, Calder explored the plastic possibilities of mobiles; he used small pieces of wood, which he shaped and sometimes painted. From this point on, Calder"™s ambition changed focus. He sought more challenging designs. One of Calder"™s objectives was to display objects in the air, giving the viewer the experience of finding new skies filled with moving and colored constellations. Calder accomplished this in
Acoustic Ceiling (1954). Calder"™s humor was evident in such works as Le Bougnat (1959) and The Pagoda (1963). Later, Calder cut fantastic animals from sheet metal, creating La Vache and Elephant (both 1970) and a mobile entitled Nervous Wreck (1976), which represents the red skeleton of a fish. Calder defined volume without mass and incorporated movement and time in art. His inventions, which redefined certain basic principles of sculpture, have established him as the most innovative sculptor of the twentieth century.
According to the passage, which of the following is an accurate statement about Object with Red Discs?

Alexander Calder was one of the most innovative and original American artists of the twentieth century. Calder arrived in Paris in 1926 and devoted himself to a innovative project comprised of animals made out of wire, scraps of cloth, wood, cork, labels, bits of scrap metal and pieces of rubber that he called the Circus.
During his performances, Calder invented ways to simulate the flight of birds: "These are little bits of white paper, with a hole and slight weight on each one, which flutter down several variously coiled thin steel wires which I jiggle so that they flutter down like doves." The Circus was the laboratory of Calder"™s work; in it he experimented with new formulas and techniques. By 1930, Calder's Circus had developed into one of the real successes of the Montparnasse art world attracting the attention of such renowned artists as Fernand Leger and Joan Miro. Encouragement from the upper echelons of the Parisian art scene undoubtedly led him to try more serious experiments in wire sculptures. Calder eventually becoming interested in the movement of objects, some of which he motorized. In 1933, Calder completed Object with Red Discs, a sculpture he described as a two-meter rod with a heavy sphere, suspended from the apex of a wire, giving it a cantilever effect. It had five thin aluminum discs projected at right angels from five wires, held in position by a spherical counterweight. With this new creation, the idea of the mobile was born. In creating a work named Constellations in 1943, Calder explored the plastic possibilities of mobiles; he used small pieces of wood, which he shaped and sometimes painted. From this point on, Calder"™s ambition changed focus. He sought more challenging designs. One of Calder"™s objectives was to display objects in the air, giving the viewer the experience of finding new skies filled with moving and colored constellations. Calder accomplished this in Acoustic
Ceiling (1954). Calder"™s humor was evident in such works as Le Bougnat (1959) and The Pagoda (1963). Later, Calder cut fantastic animals from sheet metal, creating La Vache and Elephant (both 1970) and a mobile entitled Nervous Wreck (1976), which represents the red skeleton of a fish. Calder defined volume without mass and incorporated movement and time in art. His inventions, which redefined certain basic principles of sculpture, have established him as the most innovative sculptor of the twentieth century.
According to the passage, all of the following are characteristic of Calder"™s work EXCEPT

Alexander Calder was one of the most innovative and original American artists of the twentieth century. Calder arrived in Paris in 1926 and devoted himself to a innovative project comprised of animals made out of wire, scraps of cloth, wood, cork, labels, bits of scrap metal and pieces of rubber that he called the Circus.
During his performances, Calder invented ways to simulate the flight of birds: "These are little bits of white paper, with a hole and slight weight on each one, which flutter down several variously coiled thin steel wires which I jiggle so that they flutter down like doves." The Circus was the laboratory of Calder"™s work; in it he experimented with new formulas and techniques. By 1930, Calder's Circus had developed into one of the real successes of the Montparnasse art world attracting the attention of such renowned artists as Fernand Leger and Joan Miro. Encouragement from the upper echelons of the Parisian art scene undoubtedly led him to try more serious experiments in wire sculptures. Calder eventually becoming interested in the movement of objects, some of which he motorized. In 1933, Calder completed Object with Red Discs, a sculpture he described as a two-meter rod with a heavy sphere, suspended from the apex of a wire, giving it a cantilever effect. It had five thin aluminum discs projected at right angels from five wires, held in position by a spherical counterweight. With this new creation, the idea of the mobile was born. In creating a work named Constellations in 1943, Calder explored the plastic possibilities of mobiles; he used small pieces of wood, which he shaped and sometimes painted. From this point on, Calder"™s ambition changed focus. He sought more challenging designs. One of Calder"™s objectives was to display objects in the air, giving the viewer the experience of finding new skies filled with moving and colored constellations. Calder accomplished this in Acoustic
Ceiling (1954). Calder"™s humor was evident in such works as Le Bougnat (1959) and The Pagoda (1963). Later, Calder cut fantastic animals from sheet metal, creating La Vache and Elephant (both 1970) and a mobile entitled Nervous Wreck (1976), which represents the red skeleton of a fish. Calder defined volume without mass and incorporated movement and time in art. His inventions, which redefined certain basic principles of sculpture, have established him as the most innovative sculptor of the twentieth century.
The author"™s attitude toward the mobiles of Alexander Calder is best described as

Alexander Calder was one of the most innovative and original American artists of the twentieth century. Calder arrived in Paris in 1926 and devoted himself to a innovative project comprised of animals made out of wire, scraps of cloth, wood, cork, labels, bits of scrap metal and pieces of rubber that he called the Circus.
During his performances, Calder invented ways to simulate the flight of birds: "These are little bits of white paper, with a hole and slight weight on each one, which flutter down several variously coiled thin steel wires which I jiggle so that they flutter down like doves." The Circus was the laboratory of Calder"™s work; in it he experimented with new formulas and techniques. By 1930, Calder's Circus had developed into one of the real successes of the Montparnasse art world attracting the attention of such renowned artists as Fernand Leger and Joan Miro. Encouragement from the upper echelons of the Parisian art scene undoubtedly led him to try more serious experiments in wire sculptures. Calder eventually becoming interested in the movement of objects, some of which he motorized. In 1933, Calder completed Object with Red Discs, a sculpture he described as a two-meter rod with a heavy sphere, suspended from the apex of a wire, giving it a cantilever effect. It had five thin aluminum discs projected at right angels from five wires, held in position by a spherical counterweight. With this new creation, the idea of the mobile was born. In creating a work named Constellations in 1943, Calder explored the plastic possibilities of mobiles; he used small pieces of wood, which he shaped and sometimes painted. From this point on, Calder"™s ambition changed focus. He sought more challenging designs. One of Calder"™s objectives was to display objects in the air, giving the viewer the experience of finding new skies filled with moving and colored constellations. Calder accomplished this in Acoustic
Ceiling (1954). Calder"™s humor was evident in such works as Le Bougnat (1959) and The Pagoda (1963). Later, Calder cut fantastic animals from sheet metal, creating La Vache and Elephant (both 1970) and a mobile entitled Nervous Wreck (1976), which represents the red skeleton of a fish. Calder defined volume without mass and incorporated movement and time in art. His inventions, which redefined certain basic principles of sculpture, have established him as the most innovative sculptor of the twentieth century.
It can be inferred from the passage that which of the following statement was true of the Parisian art scene?