Question

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows. \textit{Passage:} The lovely thing about the unsayable is that it is unsaid. As soon as it is said, it is sayable and loses all its mystery and ambiguity. Art exists so that the unsayable can be said without having to actually say it. We cloud it in secrecy and obfuscation. The mind is free to roam and all things can be imagined, under the cover of darkness. How nice that is. The unsayable. How tired we are of having things explained to us. Having things said. How nice it is when people just shut ... up. Which of the following options can be BEST inferred from the passage?

• A. Art echoes the language that is unintelligible.
• B. Any piece of art defies expression.
• C. Art expresses what humans cannot communicate in words.
• D. Explaining an art metamorphoses into another piece of art.
• E. Art unfolds the mystery of human tongues.

Hint:

For inference questions, find the sentence that captures the central “why art exists” logic — here, it’s about expressing the inexpressible.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

The given passage discusses the concept of the "unsayable" in art, emphasizing that art allows expression without explicit communication. Let's carefully analyze each option and determine which one aligns best with the passage. 

1. The passage suggests that art provides a medium for expressing thoughts and emotions that language cannot convey explicitly. This idea is closely linked to option: Art expresses what humans cannot communicate in words. This option captures the essence of the passage by articulating that art serves as a vessel for conveying the 'unsayable.' Hence, this is the correct answer.
2. Let's evaluate why other options are incorrect:

Art echoes the language that is unintelligible.

• - This option suggests that art reproduces unintelligible language, which is not the main focus of the passage. The passage highlights art's ability to communicate beyond words rather than repeating unintelligible language.

Any piece of art defies expression.

• - This implies that art itself cannot be expressed or perhaps cannot express anything, which contradicts the passage that discusses how art provides a means to convey what cannot be said. This option does not match the passage's view.

Explaining an art metamorphoses into another piece of art.

• - This statement suggests a transformation through explanation, which the passage does not imply. The passage focuses on the idea of keeping unsaid things unsaid through art rather than transforming art through explanation.

Art unfolds the mystery of human tongues.

• - This option suggests that art deciphers language mysteries, whereas the passage indicates art transcends verbal language’s expressiveness by keeping things "unsaid."

Conclusion: The correct answer is that art expresses what humans cannot communicate in words, as it aligns with the passage's main idea of conveying the 'unsayable' through art without resorting to explicit language.

Answer 2

Step 1: Understand the passage.
The passage emphasizes that once something is said, it loses mystery. Art exists to convey what cannot be fully expressed in words — the “unsayable.”
Step 2: Evaluate options.
- Option A: Too vague; “unintelligible” is not the focus. - Option B: Wrong; not all art defies expression, art is precisely a medium to express the unsayable. - Option C: Correct — directly matches the idea that art says what words cannot. - Option D: Over-interpretation. Explaining art may not create another art form. - Option E: Metaphorical, but not precise.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The best inference is Option C.
Final Answer: \[ \boxed{\text{C}} \]