While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes: - Eero Vasara's concert hall in Turku opened in 1969 after four years of construction and two budget overruns. - Local newspapers called its concrete exterior brutal and unfinished, and one called for its demolition. - The city council voted twice in the 1980s to demolish the building by narrow margins after long public hearings. - The hall was given protected status in 2004. - It now appears on the cover of the city's tourist guide.
The student wants to emphasise how the building's reputation changed. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
- A) The hall opened in 1969 and its concrete exterior was disliked intensely by the newspapers of the time, one of which called for its demolition.
- B) Eero Vasara's concert hall in Turku was given protected status in the year 2004.
- C) Local newspapers called the hall's concrete exterior brutal and unfinished when it opened in 1969.
- D) A hall the council twice voted to demolish in the 1980s was protected in 2004 and now fronts the city's tourist guide. ✓
Why: A change in reputation needs both ends of it, and only this choice moves from demolition votes to protection and publicity. The early hostility and the later protection each give one end alone. Local newspapers called the hall's concrete exterior brutal and unfinished when it opened in 1969. gives the early reaction only, so no change is shown. Eero Vasara's concert hall in Turku was given protected status in the year 2004. gives the later status only, with nothing earlier to contrast it with. The hall opened in 1969 and its concrete exterior was disliked intensely by the newspapers of the time, one of which called for its demolition. describes the building and its first reception without the later reversal.