PrepTest 134, Section 1, Question 15
The French novelist Colette (1873–1954) has been widely(56 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- ACritics who suggest(17 more words not shown)
- BA novel that(21 more words not shown)
- CTo deserve the(17 more words not shown)
- DThe vividness of(10 more words not shown)
- EColette's purpose in(24 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Does writing about a moral problem mean the novel pays attention to its moral importance?
Colette's vivid language doesn't settle that question. A novel can be beautifully written while saying little about a particular moral concern. And even if we personally think a novelist needn't address every important issue, that's not the defense this author offers. The author argues that the criticism is unfair because Colette's novels condense emotional crises, and those crises almost always raise moral questions.
Let's accept that connection between the crises and moral questions. We still have a gap. A story could portray an emotional crisis while passing over the moral problem within it. Raising a question through the events described isn't automatically the same as engaging with it.
What we’re looking for
We're asked for an assumption the defense depends on. I'd look for a connection between portraying these crises and engaging with their moral questions. The emotional subject matter alone hasn't yet answered the critics' charge. Keep that gap in mind as we look for something the author needs to accept.
Working the answers
- A
These critics could appreciate Colette's literary achievements while objecting to one aspect of her work. The argument doesn't need to establish that they greatly underestimate her overall accomplishments. It needs to answer the particular charge of indifference to moral questions.
- BCorrect
A novel that poetically condenses an emotional crisis need not be indifferent to its moral questions. That's a limited claim: this form of writing can involve moral engagement.
Test what happens if it is false. If every novel that poetically condensed such a crisis had to be indifferent to its moral questions, the author's evidence would work against the defense. Pointing out that Colette's novels have precisely that form would establish the alleged indifference, not answer it. The argument therefore needs B, even though B alone doesn't prove that Colette actually engages with the questions. Possible engagement is necessary here; guaranteed engagement is more than the answer says.
- C
The argument defends Colette against a particular criticism; it doesn't establish a standard for how much praise a novelist deserves. She could deserve praise for vivid language regardless of how she treats moral questions, and the author's attempted defense would remain the same.
- D
How the language became vivid doesn't answer whether the novels are morally indifferent. Poetic condensation could contribute to vividness or fail to do so without settling the issue the author is arguing about.
- E
Intending to explore moral questions isn't required for the novels actually to engage with them. A writer might do so without that being the stated purpose. And a purpose alone wouldn't establish success: aiming for a perfect test score doesn't mean achieving it. The defense concerns what the novels do, not Colette's intentions.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.