PrepTest 132

[lcid:3626] Prep Test 132 LSAT — Reading Comp — S3 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 1-7  .        The work of South African writer Ezekiel  . Mphahlele has confounded literary critics, especially  . those Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Humanities


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • An writer confounds critics; Author explains
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Critics - Mphahlele’s autobiography is too fictional; his fiction is too autobiographical
    • Author - Mphahlele doesn’t fit labels - he uses prose to advance social message

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Criticism of Mphahlele’s work; Mphahlele’s response; Author’s response
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Criticism - Even positive has negative subtext
    • Example - The Wanderers - Praised firsthand experiences (and other things), but others dismiss for autobiography
    • Mphahlele - Fictional relationship serves as beginning/end
    • Author - Mphahlele has a strong vision of the future “wonderfully articulated”
    • Critics balk (how do we get there?)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Mphahlele’s views on writing
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Mphahlele - Can’t write just fact or fiction - experiences pervade fiction, and maximizing social message changes facts
    • Mphahlele (Author) - Writing isn’t about classification but about transmitting ideas
    • Quote

Main Point: Those who criticize the works of Mphahlele for not clearly falling into autobiography or fiction don’t recognize that he writes to convey a social message and thus classifying him misses the point, as Mphahlele himself recognizes.

Key Lines?

Lines 1-4 - An opposing point

Lines 12-14 - More of the opposing view

Lines 16-17 - The Author’s view on Mphahlele

Lines 18-19 - More from critics

Lines 30-33 - Mphahlele defends his work

Lines 33-35 - The Author’s defense of Mphahlele’s works

Lines 46-51 - Mphahlele’s thoughts on writing

Lines 51-53 - Mphalele and the Author on writing

Meta-Structure?

Defending an Artist from Critics - One common Humanities Meta-Structure is Defending an Artist from Critics. In this type of passage, the Author highlights criticism of an artist and why that criticism is wrong. It’s important to track the view of the Critics, why the Author thinks they’re wrong, and what the artist thinks, if that’s present in the passage. Putting all of this together led us to the main point as we stated it above.

Last Thoughts?

A lot of this passage dealt with a split between autobiography and fiction. The Critics felt that there was a distinct line between the two, while the Author and Mphahlele believed that it could be broken down in service of conveying a social message. As such, we need to be careful when answering questions that we know from whose viewpoint it’s being asked, and either draw a distinction between fiction and autobiography if the Critics’ view is being asked about, or blur that distinction for questions about the Author’s or Mphahlele’s view.

Question prompt

The passage states that Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Humanities

Strategy Overview

Review statements made by Mphahlele, then find an answer that lines up with them

Answer Anticipation

We just got done reviewing Mphahlele’s viewpoint for the last question, so we should view this one as a continuation of that - using the exact same anticipation as we did there to help us here.Looking at our notes, the first time Mphahlele’s viewpoint is discussed is when he defends his work from criticism in Paragraph 2, Lines 30-33. There, he cites the fictional relationship that opens and closes his novel. That’s not really a viewpoint but rather a fact of his book, so it’s unlikely to lead to a correct answer.Paragraph 3 is Mphahlele’s views on writing, so there’s a lot to go on there. He says that you can’t write just fiction because details are drawn from your real life, and you can’t write just fact because you have to adapt the details to “maximize the effectiveness of the social message” (Lines 46-51). He also says writing isn’t about classification but rather about conveying a message (Lines 51-53). And he has some harsh words for people who don’t try to write social criticism (Lines 55-59).

Answer choices

  1. A
    Writing should provide a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) (Lines 37-40) The Author says that Mphahlele’s works include a vision of the future but no road map for how to get there, and Mphahlele doesn’t say anything to contradict that view.

  2. B
    Writing should have as Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem

    (B) (Lines 51-55) The passage ends with Mphahlele claiming that there’s no room for classification in writing, as in “all forms writing is the transmission of ideas,” so this is the correct answer.

  3. C
    Writing is most effective Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) (Lines 43-44) Mphahlele considers Down Second Avenue an autobiography, so he definitely isn’t shy about writing about real people and events. He also claims that all details of even fiction are drawn from the Author’s life and thus reflect facts in some way. He believes that these details should be changed to “maximize the effectiveness of the social message” (Lines 49-50), but that’s a far cry from this answer’s call to “minimize the use” of real things.

  4. D
    Good writing is generally Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) (Lines 49-53) Mphahlele is against classification, so he wouldn’t say that good writing is more in one classification than another.

  5. E
    Fiction and autobiography are Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) (Lines 49-53) Yet another answer focusing on classifications! Mphahlele believed that writing “has nothing to do with classification,” so we can rule this out.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion