Which is it? Are questions to be easy, or
expansive?
Expansive, but with three
guidelines:
1. The 'expansions' should be done as interestingly
as possible, and with the greatest
quality.
2. The 'expansions' should be done slowly, with
writers and editors limiting themselves to one question
per category and two-three per pack.
3. The
'expansions' should use a higher standard of 'importance' than
questions that are not 'expansions'. If I write a question
that's an 'expansion' I do so because I genuinely feel
that it's of greater importance to the world (or at
least the world of thought, history, and liberal arts)
than the vast majority of questions in the 'canon'.
This is obviously subjective, but I can defend any
subjective choice I've made in the past.
If there's
a South American painter that's more important
than, say, Giotto, please write about him/her. If
there's a South American painter that's of equal
importance to say, Fragonard (not to dis him specificallY)
than you should consider if the 'expansion' belongs
somewhere else.
Jer