critical reading question

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

<p>hey guys
i have a cr question (from one of the online course tests)</p>

<p>Passage 1 is by Dorothy Sayers; Passage 2 is adapted from a work by Raymond Chandler.
Passage 1</p>

<p>The detective story does not and cannot attain the
loftiest level of literary achievement. Though it deals
with the most desperate effects of rage, jealousy, and
Line revenge, it rarely touches the heights and depths of
5 human passion. It presents us with an accomplished
fact, and looks upon death with a dispassionate eye. It
does not show us the inner workings of the murderer’s
mind—it must not, for the identity of the criminal is
hidden until the end of the book. The most successful
10 writers are those who contrive to keep the story running
from beginning to end upon the same emotional level,
and it is better to err in the direction of too little feeling
than too much.</p>

<p>Passage 2</p>

<p>I think what was really gnawing at Dorothy Sayers in
15 her critique of the detective story was the realization that
her kind of detective story was an arid formula unable to
satisfy its own implications. If the story started to be about
real people, they soon had to do unreal things to conform
to the artificial pattern required by the plot. When they did
20 unreal things, they ceased to be real themselves. Sayers’
own stories show that she was annoyed by this triteness.
Yet she would not give her characters their heads and let
them make their own mystery.</p>

<p>the question is:</p>

<p>The author of Passage 2 would most likely respond to the statement in lines 4-5, Passage 1 ("it rarely ... passion"), by:</p>

<p>(a) arguing that this approach limits the characters' development
(b) denying that most writers of detective stories rely on formulas
(c) agreeing that strong emotions are out of place in detective stories
(d) conceding that great literature is seldom commercially successful
(e) concurring that readers are primarily interested in plot</p>

<p>the answer is A but i don't understand how reasoning. can someone please explain it? also, why isn't the answer C (which is what i marked)?</p>

<p>thanks in advance :)</p>

2

<p>The answer is (A), which was my first choice, because in the last lines of the second paragraph, Chandler states that Sayer didn’t give characters their heads and make their own mystery, which means Sayer didn’t allow characters to develop on their own. Thus, he would respond to lines 4-5 by arguing against Chandler, or choice (A).</p>

<p>Another approach is to ascertain that Chandler doesn’t agree with Sayer, which is implied in the first line of the second paragraph, where Chandler has a different opinion of Sayer’s thoughts in her critique. Thus, choices (C) (D) and (E) can be eliminated because they all involve Chandler agreeing with Sayer. Chandler says nothing about any other writers besides Sayer, so (B) is eliminated also. Looking at (A), it is a logical answer, so the answer is choice (A). </p>

<p>Remember that if a choice has information not stated explicitly or, in some cases, implicitly, than it is the wrong answer.</p>

3

<p>Thank you so much!</p>