LSAT 132, Section 3, RC Passage 1, Ezekiel Mphahlele

RC Passage 1 Explanation

PASSAGE TEXT: The work of South African writer Ezekiel Mphahlele has confounded literary critics, especially …

Paragraph Summaries

1. Critics struggle to classify Mphahlele’s work because his autobiography and novel blur the line between fact and fiction. This focus on labels misses the point: Mphahlele uses literary forms to communicate a social message.
2. Even favorable critics often imply that The Wanderers falls short as literature because of its autobiographical features or because Mphahlele’s humanistic social vision lacks a practical roadmap for change.
3. Mphahlele himself largely rejects the importance of strict classifications. All writing draws on experience and reshapes it to communicate ideas and social criticism.

Analysis

This passage is basically one long complaint that critics are asking the wrong question.

The critics are obsessed with “Is this an autobiography or a novel?” Mphahlele’s response is essentially: Who cares?! The category is secondary. The purpose of writing is transmitting ideas and social criticism.

The first paragraph is setting up the false choice. Down Second Avenue is supposedly too fictionalized to be a proper autobiography, while The Wanderers is supposedly too autobiographical to be a proper novel. The symmetry is funny: whichever box critics put him in, he spills out of it.

The author clearly sides with Mphahlele here. Notice the language: critics “inevitably miss” the point, his social vision is “wonderfully” articulated, and it is “underappreciated.” The author isn’t neutral, so answer choices that suggest so are missing the mark.

A nice thing to track: the passage distinguishes two kinds of criticism.

1. Formal criticism: people object to the autobiography/fiction blending.
2. Substantive criticism: people balk at his social vision because he doesn’t provide a blueprint for achieving it.

The author thinks both criticisms miss what matters.

The last quote gives you Mphahlele’s entire philosophy: writing is social criticism. What matters is whether the work says something meaningful about society. That’s why answer choices emphasizing classification are usually traps and answer choices emphasizing communication of ideas and social messages are usually right.