Skip to main contentSkip to solution

Stories concerning the Undead have always been with us. From out of the primal darkness of Mankind's earliest years, come whispers of eerie creatures, not quite alive (or alive in a way which we can understand), yet not quite dead either. These may have been ancient and primitive deities who dwelt deep in the surrounding forests and in remote places, or simply those deceased who refused to remain in their tombs and who wandered about the countryside, physically tormenting and frightening those who were still alive. Mostly they were ill-defined strange sounds in the night beyond the comforting glow of the fire, or a shape, half-glimpsed in the twilight along the edge of an encampment. They were vague and indistinct, but they were always there with the power to terrify and disturb. They had the power to touch the minds of our early ancestors and to fill them with dread. Such fear formed the basis of the earliest tales although the source and exact nature of such terrors still remained very vague.

And as Mankind became more sophisticated, leaving the gloom of their caves and forming themselves into recognizable communities, towns, cities, whole cultures so the Undead travelled with them, inhabiting their folklore just as they had in former times. Now they began to take on more definite shapes. They became walking cadavers; the physical embodiment of former deities and things which had existed alongside Man since the Creation. Some still remained vague and ill-defined but, as Mankind strove to explain the horror which it felt towards them, such creatures emerged more readily into the light.

In order to confirm their abnormal status, many of the Undead were often accorded attributes, which defied the natural order of things. The power to transform themselves into other shapes, the ability to sustain themselves by drinking human blood, and the ability to influence human minds across a distance. Such powers described as supernatural only lent an added dimension to the terror that humans felt regarding them.

And it was only natural, too, that the Undead should become connected with the practice of magic. From very early times, Shamans and witchdoctors had claimed at least some power and control over the spirits of departed ancestors, and this has continued down into more "civilized" times. Formerly, the invisible spirits and forces that thronged around men's earliest encampments, had spoken "through" the tribal Shamans but now, as entities in their own right, they were subject to magical control and could be physically summoned by a competent sorcerer. However, the relationship between the magician and an Undead creature was often a very tenuous and uncertain one. Some sorcerers might have even become Undead entities once they died, but they might also have been susceptible to the powers of other magicians when they did.

From the Middle Ages and into the Age of Enlightenment, theories of the Undead continued to grow and develop. Their names became more familiar werewolf, vampire, ghoul-each one certain to strike fear into the hearts of ordinary humans.

Which one of the following observations is a valid conclusion to draw from the statement, "From out of the primal darkness of Mankind's earliest years, come whispers of eerie creatures, not quite alive (or alive in a way which we can understand), yet not quite dead either."?

Solution

βœ… Correct Option: 3

From passage: "From out of the primal darkness of Mankind's earliest years, come whispers of eerie creatures, not quite alive (or alive in a way which we can understand), yet not quite dead either."

The key word here is "whispers" -> this means stories or tales about these creatures, not the creatures themselves making sounds. The passage is talking about beliefs and stories that existed in early times.

Think process: What does "whispers of creatures" mean? -> Stories about creatures -> These were beliefs people had -> Not actual creatures whispering.


πŸ”΄ Option 1 -> misreading -> says creatures were whispering that they weren't dead, but passage says there were "whispers of creatures" (stories about them), not whispers by creatures

πŸ”΄ Option 2 -> misreading -> says creatures were "alive with whispers" and "seen in darkness" but passage doesn't say they were seen at all - just that there were stories about them

🟒 Option 3 -> correct -> captures that these were beliefs (not actual creatures) and correctly states they were neither alive nor dead

πŸ”΄ Option 4 -> contradicts passage -> says we can understand them through whispers, but passage says they were alive "in a way which we can understand" (meaning we can't understand them)

The confusion students often have: They think "whispers" means the creatures were making sounds. But "whispers of something" means stories about something. Option 3 correctly identifies these as beliefs that existed in early human history.

Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Left arrow: Previous question
  • Right arrow: Next question
  • S key: Jump to solution
  • Q key: Jump to question