Question 153·Hard·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Although lively, Numbering the Future, a recent biography of Ada Lovelace, constructs too tidy a tale of solitary genius. Leaning on published versions of Lovelace’s “Notes” and on oft-repeated anecdotes, the book minimizes the editorial presence of Charles Babbage and the circle of mathematicians and tutors who informed her work. In doing so, it mistakes a collaborative achievement for singular originality. Had the biographer engaged more fully with Babbage’s notebooks and the surviving correspondence—materials that complicate any clean division of credit—the account would likely be more measured.
Text 2
As an antidote to decades of condescension, Numbering the Future is welcome. Its reconstruction of Lovelace’s education and ambitions, grounded in letters, account books, and marginalia, is persuasive. Yet the book presses beyond what those documents can bear: from a handful of suggestive remarks it concludes that Lovelace anticipated the modern notion of universal computation. The research base is admirably broad; the leap from implication to certainty is not.
Which choice best describes a difference in how the authors of Text 1 and Text 2 evaluate Numbering the Future?
For cross-text connection questions, first read each text separately and quickly note the author’s attitude (positive, negative, mixed) and the main reason for that attitude (e.g., source use, argument strength, tone). Then, before looking at the answer choices, summarize the difference between the texts in your own words in one short sentence. Finally, test each choice against that summary and eliminate any option that misstates even one side’s view—if a choice gets one text wrong, it cannot be correct. This keep-you-honest comparison is faster and more reliable than trying to make an answer fit.
Hints
Clarify Text 1’s main criticism
Reread Text 1 and ask: Is the author more upset about the topic of the book or about how the story is constructed—especially which sources are used and what picture they create of Lovelace?
Clarify Text 2’s mix of praise and criticism
In Text 2, underline what is said about the research base (letters, account books, marginalia) and what is said about the book’s main claim about Lovelace anticipating universal computation. Is the author criticizing the research itself or something else?
Look for an answer that captures both sides accurately
Eliminate any choice where either Text 1’s critique or Text 2’s critique does not match what the passage actually says. Make sure the choice gets both the sources issue in Text 1 and the evidence-versus-conclusion issue in Text 2 correct.
Step-by-step Explanation
Determine Text 1’s overall view of the biography
Focus on the key opinion words and explanations in Text 1.
- It says the book "constructs too tidy a tale of solitary genius" and "mistakes a collaborative achievement for singular originality." This is clearly critical.
- It explains how the book goes wrong: "Leaning on published versions of Lovelace’s ‘Notes’ and on oft-repeated anecdotes, the book minimizes the editorial presence of Charles Babbage" and others.
- The author adds that if the biographer had used Babbage’s notebooks and more correspondence, the account "would likely be more measured."
So Text 1’s main criticism is that the biographer uses a narrow selection of sources that leads to an overstatement of Lovelace’s individual originality.
Determine Text 2’s overall view of the biography
Now look at how Text 2 evaluates the same book.
- It starts positively: "As an antidote to decades of condescension, Numbering the Future is welcome."
- It praises the research: "Its reconstruction ... grounded in letters, account books, and marginalia, is persuasive" and "The research base is admirably broad."
- But it adds a criticism: the book "presses beyond what those documents can bear" and "from a handful of suggestive remarks it concludes that Lovelace anticipated the modern notion of universal computation." The problem is the "leap from implication to certainty."
So Text 2 likes the broad and careful research but thinks the author’s big conclusion about Lovelace’s foresight goes beyond what the evidence justifies.
Summarize the difference between the two evaluations
Compare the two viewpoints directly:
- Text 1: The main issue is how the biography uses sources: it relies on limited, familiar materials and underplays collaborators, which inflates Lovelace’s originality as a lone genius.
- Text 2: The main issue is not the research base (which is broad and admirable) but the strength of the conclusion about Lovelace anticipating modern universal computation. The evidence is suggestive but not strong enough for such certainty.
In short:
- Text 1: narrow sources → exaggerated originality.
- Text 2: broad sources → overconfident conclusion about her foresight.
Match this combined understanding to the answer choices
A correct choice must say that:
- Text 1 criticizes the biography for using too narrow a set of sources in a way that overstates Lovelace’s originality, and
- Text 2 praises the breadth of research but says the book’s conclusions exceed what the evidence supports.
Only this option does both: “The author of Text 1 argues that the biographer's narrow selection of sources inflates Lovelace's originality, whereas the author of Text 2 praises the breadth of research but contends that the book's conclusions about her foresight exceed the evidence.”