<p>This was from the May 2008 Sunday SAT Test:</p>
<p>The main idea of this passage was that society should not attempt to control the Individualism of creative art. In other words, society should not control the ideas that artists use to base their art on.</p>
<p>"The one thing that the public dislikes is novelty. Any attempt to extend the subject of matter of art is extremely distasteful to the public; and yet the vitality and progress of art depend in a large measure on the continual extension of subject matter. The public dislikes novelty because it is afraid of it. It represents to the public a mode of Individualism, an assertion that the artist has power over the selection and treatment of the work's subject. The public is quite right in its attitude. Art is Individualism, and Individualism is a disturbing and disintegrating force. Therein lies its immense value. For what it seeks to disturb is monotony of type, slavery of custom, tyranny of habit, and the reduction of people to the level of machines."</p>
<p>How does the author's last paragraph change the direction of the argument offered in the first paragraph?</p>
<p>B. It reaches a compromise after initially taking a radical stance.
C. It focuses on the social impact of art rather than the creative act.</p>
<p>I picked B because the author wrote, "The public is quite right in its attitude..." Thereby, he shows that he reaches a compromise. And I believe that he had quite a radical stance earlier in the passage.</p>
<p>Yes, the first paragraph focuses on the creative act of art. But I also assert that the last paragraph is talking about the creative act of art as well, "tyranny of habit, etc." The last sentence is not talking about societal impacts as it is creativity?</p>