GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was ... Start Learning for Free
In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.
Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French people from all walks of life.
The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.
Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?
  • a)
    To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.
  • b)
    To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursors
  • c)
    To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.
  • d)
    To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.
  • e)
    To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Verified Answer
In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French en...
Passage Analysis
Summary and Main Point
Pre-Thinking
This is a Main Idea question. The correct answer must be broad enough to encompass all of the paragraphs of the passage without veering outside the scope. Incorrect answer choices are often too narrow or focus only on one or two paragraphs.
Reviewing the individual paragraph summaries, we see that the first paragraph explains how the idea to construct Eiffel Tower was convinced and got approved. The second paragraph talks about the initial support for the Tower that turned into criticism.  The last paragraph talks about the specific class that was against the construction of the Tower. Hence, the main purpose of the author in writing this passage is to present how the idea of Eiffel Tower was conceived and the the criticism it faced.
 
Answer Choices
A
To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.
Incorrect: Partial scope
This choice includes the discussion mentioned only in the first two paragraphs. The correct answer for a Main Idea question should include ALL of the paragraphs – even the final one.   
B
To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursors
Incorrect: Partial scope
The precursors to the Eiffel Tower are only mentioned in the first paragraph – the bridges and viaduct. If this were the main goal, then more precursors would be discussed in subsequent paragraphs. 
C
To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.
Incorrect: Partial scope
While this is a detail mentioned in the second paragraph only, look for an answer choice that best encapsulates ALL of the paragraphs. 
D
To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.
Incorrect: Out of Scope
The scope of the passage focuses only on the Tower’s planning, approval, and construction. We do not know how the public felt about the Tower after the Exposition. 
E
To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.
Correct
The passage is a broad overview on the structural engineering that helped build the Tower, its approval, and how the public opinion on it evolved. 
View all questions of this test
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Towers construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasmon the part of the fairs Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structurethere grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structures shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils are mentioned by the passage in order to

In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Towers construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasmon the part of the fairs Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structurethere grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structures shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which faction does the author refer to when he mentions undercurrent in the last paragraph?

In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Based on the discussion of public opinion regarding the Eiffel Towers construction it can be inferred that

Disruptive innovators can hurt successful and immensely profitable incumbents that tend to ignore the markets most susceptible to disruptive innovations. Disruptive innovators offer technologically straightforward solutions consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that is often simpler, initially lower performing, and cheaper than established approaches. Considering disruptive technologies unprofitable, the executives at incumbents often ignored them at their own and companies peril. In 1981, the old 8 inch drives used in mini computers were vastly superior and much more profitable to the new 5.25 inch drives used in desktop computers. However, 8 inch drives were not affordable for the new desktop machines. Slowly, the makers of 5.25 inch drives improved the performance of the drives and moved the 8 inch drive companies that did not invest in the 5.25 inch technology out of the market as the latter could not compete on price. Similarly, digital cameras, when introduced in 1997 performed extremely poorly as compared to traditional film cameras. Consequently, many traditional film companies such as Kodak ignored this market only to be bankrupted by the rise of digital cameras a decade later.Leaders and strategists should be cautious while rejecting a technology that does not seem to be as high performing and hence not as profitable as their dominant technologies. A technology that initially provides low performance can drastically improve over time and often exceed the performance of the dominant technology at a much lower price-point, a scenario that could potentially bankrupt the incumbents who ignored the technology at their peril.Which of the following exemplifies a technological disruption as described in the passage through the 8 inch and 5.25 inch disc drive example?

Top Courses for GMAT

In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2024 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice In the year 1885, the Eiffel firm, which was named after the French engineer and architect Gustave Eiffel and which had extensive experience in structural engineering, undertook a series of investigations of tall metallic piers based upon its recent experiences with several railway viaducts and bridges. The most spectacular of these was the famous Garabit Viaduct, which carries a railroad some 400 feet above the valley of the Truyere in southern France. The design of this structure was the inspiration for the design of a 395-foot pier, which, although never incorporated into a bridge, is said to have been the direct basis for the Eiffel Tower. Preliminary studies for a 300-meter tower were made with the intention of showcasing it in the 1889 fair called Exposition Universelle. With an assurance born of positive knowledge, Eiffel in June of 1886 approached the Exposition commissioners with the project. There can be no doubt that only the singular respect with which Eiffel was regarded not only by his profession but by the entire nation motivated the Commission to approve a plan which, in the hands of a figure of less stature, would have been considered grossly impractical.Between this time and the commencement of the Tower’s construction at the end of January 1887, there arose one of the most persistently annoying of the numerous difficulties, both structural and social, which confronted Eiffel as the project advanced. In the wake of the initial enthusiasm—on the part of the fair’s Commission that was inspired by the desire to create a monument to highlight French technological achievement, and on the part of the majority of French people by the stirring of their imagination at the magnitude of the structure—there grew a rising movement of disfavor. At the center of this movement was, not surprisingly, the intelligentsia, but objections were made by prominent French peoplefrom all walks of life.The most interesting point to be noted in a retrospection of this often violent opposition is that, although every aspect of the Tower was attacked, there was remarkably little criticism of its structural feasibility, either by the engineering profession or, as seems traditionally to be the case with bold and unprecedented undertakings, by large numbers of the technically uninformed population. True, there was an undercurrent of what might be characterized as unease by many property owners in the structure’s shadow, but the most obstinate element of resistance was that which deplored the Tower as a mechanistic intrusion upon the architectural and natural beauties of Paris. This resistance voiced its fury in a flood of special newspaper editions, petitions, and manifestos signed by such lights of the fine and literary arts as De Maupassant, Gounod, Dumas fils, and others.Which of the following is the author’s primary purpose behind this passage?a)To discuss the feasibility of the Eiffel Firm's plan for the Tower.b)To teach the history of the Eiffel Tower's precursorsc)To explain how the Tower would not have been approved without Eiffel's reputation and knowledge of structural engineering.d)To detail how the public turned against the Tower in the months after the Exposition.e)To give a general history of the Tower's construction and the public reaction to it.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev