Help

Alicia's conclusion is "Franchot was not a great writer." Why not? Well because the mark of a great writer is the ability to move people with the power of the written word, not the ability to be among the first to grasp a social issue, which is the standard Concetta's suggests in her argument for Franchot being a great writer. Alicia then takes issue with the idea that Franchot was actually one of the first to grasp a social issue. Let's break down answer choice (C): Rejects Concetta's criterion (i.e. the mark of a great writer is the ability to be among the first to grasp a social issue) and then disputes a specific claim (i.e. that Franchot was actually one of the first to grasp the social issue of the industrialization, "Besides, the social consequences of the industrialization were widely understood in Franchot's day."). As such, (C) would be the correct answer. (D) is incorrect because Alicia never presents facts in support of an alternative criterion. Facts in support of an alternative criterion would be facts demonstrating that Franchot was not able to move people with the power of the written word. Rather Alicia merely puts forth an alternative criterion and then takes issue with the claim made by Concetta that Franchot was among the first to grasp the social issue of the industrialization. As such, (D) would be incorrect. Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

It makes me understood vividly!!! I'm getting closer to my goal thanks to you guys!!! Thanks a lot, again.

Hi-This one seems a bit tricky... Isn't a possible alternative criterion just the mere fact that, to Alicia, ..."[t]he mark of a great writer is the ability to move people with the power of the written word..."?

is the "facts" word in D the main reason it's not correct?

actually nevermind! I might be good:)