Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The phrase "Far from being X, Y was Z" indicates a contrast or clarification. It means "Y was not X; instead, Y was Z." The sentence is clarifying the nature of Pat's tendency to be acquiescent (ready to accept something without protest).
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The sentence aims to define Pat's behavior more precisely. Let's analyze the options:
\begin{itemize}
\item (A) "Far from being unctuous (falsely flattering), Pat was always loath (reluctant) to appear acquiescent." This suggests Pat hated appearing agreeable, which contradicts the idea of clarifying her acquiescence.
\item (B) "Far from being brazen (bold), Pat was always reluctant to appear acquiescent." This doesn't establish a clear contrast regarding agreeableness.
\item (D) "Far from being obsequious, Pat was always eager to appear acquiescent." This option provides a subtle but important distinction. "Obsequious" means being excessively servile or fawning, which is an extreme and often negative form of acquiescence. "Eager" is a more neutral term for being willing. The sentence is clarifying that Pat's agreeableness was not a servile or fawning (obsequious) trait; rather, she was simply genuinely willing or "eager" to seem agreeable. This contrast effectively refines the description of her character.
\item (E) "Far from being gregarious (sociable), Pat was always willing to appear acquiescent." Sociability and agreeableness are different traits, so the contrast is weak.
\end{itemize}
Option (D) provides the most logical and nuanced meaning. It clarifies that Pat was not a sycophant, but simply a willing person.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The pair "obsequious.. eager" provides the best contrast, clarifying that Pat's willingness to agree was genuine eagerness, not excessive servility.