PrepTest 147, Section 4, Question 15
Many scholars claim that Shakespeare's portrayal of Richard(50 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(13 more words not shown)
- AIn historical drama,(13 more words not shown)
- BIn dealing with(8 more words not shown)
- CShakespeare's historical importance(9 more words not shown)
- DHistory is always(7 more words not shown)
- EHistorical inaccuracies should(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Was Shakespeare's portrayal actually inaccurate? To decide that, we'd want to compare it with reliable information about Richard III, not just note where Shakespeare got his material. But the author is making a different point: even if the portrayal is inaccurate, it can still be fascinating and artistically valuable.
What we’re looking for
You might worry about the damage an unfair portrayal does to someone's reputation. That's a real objection to consider, but it doesn't automatically answer whether the work has artistic value. The argument separates appreciating the drama from treating it as an accurate history. For a principle that supports this reasoning, I'd look for something saying historical accuracy isn't what determines that appreciation.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
A historical error doesn't necessarily destroy a work's aesthetic value. That supports the author's point that the portrayal can remain valuable regardless of its accuracy. Notice that A is more modest than saying accuracy never matters: it leaves room for inaccuracies to undermine some works while denying that they must undermine this one. That is enough to help this argument.
- B
This gives dramatists a duty to portray real people accurately. It creates a reason to criticize an inaccurate portrayal, rather than supporting the author's dismissal of inaccuracy as a concern for appreciating this work. It also doesn't explain how the portrayal's artistic qualities bear on that criticism.
- C
Putting Shakespeare beyond all literary criticism would protect him from much more than this objection. But the argument doesn't defend the play because Shakespeare is too historically important to criticize. It defends the play's aesthetic and moral interest despite possible factual errors. A supplies that particular connection without declaring the author immune from every criticism.
- D
Even if all history came from the winning side's propagandists, that wouldn't tell us what to make of the artistic value of an inaccurate drama. Explaining where historical accounts come from is different from explaining why a work can remain worth appreciating despite its errors.
- E
This is a rule about when to correct an inaccuracy, not whether an inaccurate work can have artistic value. We also haven't established that Richard III was a good person whose reputation the play impugned. The rule therefore doesn't connect the qualities the author praises to the dismissal of the historical objection.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.