#5 - Must Be True, Purpose

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=11395)

The correct answer choice is (C)

The justification for the correct answer can be found on:

(lines 55-58)

This question stem asks why the author of this passage provided the following Mphahlele quote in lines 55-58: “Whenever you write prose or poetry or drama you are writing a social criticism of one kind or another. If you don’t, you are completely irrelevant—you don’t count.” This quote offers insight into Mphahlele’s priorities, and his belief that social criticism is the factor that makes a work important.

Answer choice (A): The referenced portion was a direct quote from the author about his beliefs, not a sample of his writing. The quote at issue would not be evidentiary of Mphahlele’s eloquence as a writer, but rather as a reflection of his priorities.
Answer choice (B): The referenced quote reflects Mphahlele’s perspective, but is never implied to reflect a common goal of writing among novelists in general.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. This is exactly what Mphahlele is stating here, very clearly–social criticism in some form is an absolute requirement for a serious writer; unless a writer is writing social criticism, that writer does not count. Mphahlele values writers who write social commentary—so much so that he disregards writers who do not offer social commentary.

Answer choice (D): Mphahlele’s quote is not about his own work, or his three preferred literary forms; it is about all writing. Answer choice (D) is incorrect.

Answer choice (E) This is true with regard to social criticism: Mphahlele believes that all writing must convey social criticism. But Mphahlele does not go so far as to assert that there is no distinction between these forms.

[Chas]

I find this explanation unsatisfying. If we go back one sentence from the quote the author supports the claim that "the whole point of the exorcise of writing [as in ALL writing] has nothing to do with classification" so what is the point? We see it in the rest of the sentence "in all forms of writing is the transmission of ideas" etc. Seems to me the author is advocating for the perspective that this is and should be the basic ultimate goal of all writing. The quote further explains the context in which the writer is achieving this lofty goal. Thus the quote supports the position that writing should have, as it's goal, the transmission of ideas. It is this rubric that the writer is using to base all other arguments on. That if a work accomplished this basic goal, classification is counterproductive or at least meaningless.

[nicholaspavic]

Hi Chas!
I am sorry to hear that you found the explanation unsatisfying. It also sounds like you preferred Answer Option (E) over Answer (C). Set's try to clarify the idea of what Paragraph 3 is driving at. While its true that Paragraph 3 points out that Mphahlele is largely unconcerned with literary classification, it does not imply that he makes "no distinction at all. In examining his quote, we can see it as as a conditional, specifically:

Prose, poetry, drama social criticism

social criticism irrelevant writer

Note that the term "irrelevant" does not make the distinction between prose, poetry and drama irrelevant, rather, it makes the writer irrelevant. I have a feeling from your comment that this may be where the confusion is occuring and perhaps where the relationship between Mphalele's beliefs about social criticism indicating irrelevancy of the writer is being overstated to include distinction between poetry, prose and drama. In other words, the closing quote and last sentence do not go as far as to indicate that Mphalele never makes a distinction between them. It's just that bad versions of those affect the author's relevancy.

Thanks for the great question and I hope this helps!