LSAT 132 | Section 1 | Reading Comprehension: Q26

RC Question 26 Explanation

DISCUSSION: The second paragraph starts with a hypothesis: maybe changes such as urbanization or secularization caused the differences between Jewett and the domestic novelists.

The “but” on line 24 shows the author does not agree with this theory. The rest of the paragraph explains that the differences are more likely due to different ideas of the role of art.

Domestic novels were intended as instruction manuals as well as fiction. Jewett wrote for art’s sake.

___________

1. What the devil does this refer to? The 2nd paragraph never talks about risking the “unity” of our conception of domestic novels by trying to explain them.
2. The author didn’t show that the two explanations are incompatible. They even said the first theory may be partially correct (line 24).
3. First, there are only two hypotheses. Second, the author didn’t say all explanations were the same. They clearly prefer their own explanation, starting on line 24.
4. This is completely different from the 2nd paragraph. I’ve written an example below that fits with what this answer says. Beyond that, I can’t “explain” how this answer is wrong except to say that it didn’t happen! Not even close.
   Example of answer: We could classify all domestic novels are helpful or not helpful. Alternatively, we could classify them as dull or not dull.
   Some say neither classification is useful: we shouldn’t classify at all.
   Start of next paragraph: But I reject that counterargument. If we didn’t classify novels, what could we write about?
5. CORRECT. The different explanatory hypotheses are factors such as urbanization or secularization (lines 20-24). The mildly approving comment is in lines 24-25 (“may help to explain”). The other explanation is 26-28: a different conception of fiction explains the differences. The rest of the paragraph gives evidence for this conception.