All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >  DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given b... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.
For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.
If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, as we understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.
Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.
The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).
(2014)
Q. What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?
  • a)
    Fashion trends are numerous and cyclical
  • b)
    No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trend
  • c)
    Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skeptical
  • d)
    The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appeal
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Verified Answer
DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set...
In the second paragraph, the last sentence mentions -"…nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one".
View all questions of this test
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.According to the passage, what is the role of contradictions, as mentioned by Fred Davis?

DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.According to the passage, which of the following statements correctly describes one of the levels of communication through fashion?

DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.According to the passage, what is the relevance of the distinction between fashion and style?

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that's unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (nois e) may deflect the ball (the message).Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one – way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time.Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words – which they aren't.This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.Communication as Ping-Pong: Unlike bowling, PingPong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receiver) doesn't. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. PingPong is a back-and-forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.Communication as Dumb Charades: The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping-Pong. It's a transaction.Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative.One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud.Suppose you drew the saying "God helps those who help themselves." For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For help you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg-up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response from them, and by this point a partner may shout out, "God helps those who help themselves." Success.Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on-going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter the images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlapincreases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that "God helps those who help themselves" could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work.Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.Q. The meaning CLOSEST to 'interchangeable' in the 'Communication as Bowling' paragraph is

DIRECTIONfor the question:Answer the question based on the information given in the passage.Contradictions are a necessary ingredient for triggering intellectual creativity. While most humans struggle to maintain a sense of psychological unity, contradictions produce destabilising breaches in the self. Whether conscious or unconscious, these fissures nourish creative inspiration, which can be interpreted as a way to resolve or sublimate internal oppositions. I believe this can be said of all domains of creation. Perhaps art, literature, science or philosophy wouldn’t be possible without intrapersonal contradictions and the desire to resolve them. Is there anyone who lives according to the Stoic principle of Plutarch, in ‘perfect agreement between the maxims of men and their conduct’? No, but this isn’t always a cause for crisis. We compartmentalise knowledge, practices and emotions. In certain domains of life, some behaviours and thoughts are acceptable but not in others. For instance, lying might be seen as a heroic act when done to protect victims from a brutal regime, but in a friendly relationship it is unbearable. In labs, scientists can produce evidence-based research in the context of their professional lives, then go home and attend religious prayers addressing the existence of invisible entities. Humans live peacefully with contradictions precisely because of their capacity to compartmentalise.Q. Which of the following could be the most logical off-shoot of this ability of humans to compartmentalise and as a result be able to live with contradictions?

Top Courses for CATView all

Top Courses for CAT

DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice DIRECTIONS for questions: The passage given below is followed by a set of four questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.For as long as it has existed, fashion, being a language, has always been used as a means of communication. This very peculiar kind of communication takes place on two levels: an open one, and a hidden one. There is in fact an underlying fact, a creative value left to each individual that allows the transmission of ambiguous and equivocal messages; think of the eroticism of neglected lace, the hardness of riding boots or the provocativeness of some metal details.If we agree that fashion is a language we should emphasize that it is a very sophisticated one and, in a way, a complementary one — a tool for articulating and supporting words rather than substituting them. And if we agree that fashion is distinct from style, we must admit that its acknowledged codes are variable. This variation can occur at different levels mainly, but not only, visually, often revamping outdated meanings. The system of constantly shifting meanings, codes and values is in fact fundamental to fashion, aswe understand it in our culture. Designers know this well and they are the first to perceive signs of instability. The instabilities, ambiguities and ambivalences, described by Fred Davis in his excellent book on the subject, drive creativity to and fro between opposites such as young/old, male/ female, work/play, simplicity/complexity, revelation/ concealment, freedom/constraint, conformism/rebellion, eroticism/chastity, discretion/overstatement and so on. The field where the game of change is played is framed within couples of constantly recurring antithetic meanings. Fashion delights us by playing on the tensions between these couples — we derive a frisson from the contradictions they suggest. We may tire of a look but whenever one of these themes returns, its freshness is restored; our fascination with them seems endless. James Carse, a professor of philosophy at New York University, and a friend of mine, in one of his books, divides the world of human relations into ‘finite and infinite games’. What is the difference? In the former case, the goal of the game is to select a winner; in the latter, it is to play the game forever. Incidentally, the latter is typical of the game of children, which were in fact the author’s chief source of inspiration. Without doubt, fashion is an infinite game, since nobody is interested in starting the ultimate trend, the final one.Though changes in fashion correspond to macro-changes in cultures or societies, they nevertheless require human action, the work of creative people, of industry and the complicity of consumers. Fashion, after all, does not happen by accident.The fashion industry purposefully identifies garments and accessories as indicators of social status. Historians have suggested that this has been so since the fourteenth century. Nowadays, this identification has become a carefully planned and greatly accelerated activity. In the eternal ping-pong game between antithetical meanings, the motivating force for creativity within fashion is nearly always, or often, cultural. When Chanel urged her wealthy clients to dress like their maids, she was playing on the dialectics between the rich and the poor, the high and the low status; but the reason for her attraction to these particular themes, and the reason for the fashion’s success, was her ability to intuit the predominant social tensions of the moment (in this case ideas about the uncertainties of wealth and power initiated by the economic unrest of the 1930s).(2014)Q.What does the author wish to convey when he states that fashion is an infinite game?a)Fashion trends are numerous and cyclicalb)No one in fashion talks about the ultimate trendc)Though designers believe in the ultimate trend, fashion magazines are skepticald)The author calls fashion an infinite game based on its mass appealCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

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
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Follow Us
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup