hard · Enhanced ACT reading
Passage: The committee had asked the architect for a building that would 'speak to the city's history,' and so they were unprepared for the design she set before them: a low, glass-skinned pavilion that seemed to dissolve into the plaza rather than command it. Where they had imagined columns and a weighty cornice, she gave them transparency. History, she explained, was not only the monuments a city raised but the open squares it had always left for its citizens to gather in; her building honored the second tradition by refusing to obstruct it. The committee, who had come prepared to defend grandeur, found themselves instead reconsidering what grandeur was for.
The author includes the final sentence primarily to:
- criticize the committee for abandoning their original architectural standards.
- emphasize that the architect's design had failed to meet the committee's request.
- show that the architect's argument shifted the committee's underlying assumptions.
- explain why glass is a more durable material than stone for civic buildings.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More Enhanced ACT reading practice
- What is the main idea of the paragraph?
- Which of the following is the central point of the paragraph?
- Which choice best summarizes the main idea of the passage?
- What date was written on the map ?
- what time did Elias check his watch?
- The passage indicates that the economist responds to her critics primarily by:
- The passage most strongly suggests that the keeper's true motivation for his long service
- The author includes the examples of opening jars and carrying coconut shells primarily in