PrepTest 75, Section 3, Question 11
Literature professor: Critics charge that the work of C. F. Providence's best-known follower, S. N. Sauk, lacks aesthetic merit because it employs Providence's own uniquely potent system of symbolic motifs in the service of a political ideal that Providence�and, significantly, some of these critics as well�would reject. Granting that Sauk is more imitator than innovator, and that he maintained political views very different from those Providence maintained, it has yet to be shown that these facts make his writings any less subtly or powerfully crafted than those of his more esteemed mentor. So the critics' argument should be rejected.
Literature professor: Critics charge that the work of C. F. Providence's best-known follower, S. N. Sauk, lacks aesthetic merit because it employs Providence's own uniquely potent system of symbolic motifs in the service of a political ideal that Providence�and, significantly, some of these critics as well�would reject. Granting that Sauk is more imitator than innovator, and that he maintained political views very different from those Providence maintained, it has yet to be shown that these facts make his writings any less subtly or powerfully crafted than those of his more esteemed mentor. So the critics' argument should be rejected.
Literature professor: Critics charge that the work of C. F. Providence's best-known follower, S. N. Sauk, lacks aesthetic merit because it employs Providence's own uniquely potent system of symbolic motifs in the service of a political ideal that Providence�and, significantly, some of these critics as well�would reject. Granting that Sauk is more imitator than innovator, and that he maintained political views very different from those Providence maintained, it has yet to be shown that these facts make his writings any less subtly or powerfully crafted than those of his more esteemed mentor. So the critics' argument should be rejected.
Literature professor: Critics charge that the work of C. F. Providence's best-known follower, S. N. Sauk, lacks aesthetic merit because it employs Providence's own uniquely potent system of symbolic motifs in the service of a political ideal that Providence�and, significantly, some of these critics as well�would reject. Granting that Sauk is more imitator than innovator, and that he maintained political views very different from those Providence maintained, it has yet to be shown that these facts make his writings any less subtly or powerfully crafted than those of his more esteemed mentor. So the critics' argument should be rejected.
The literature professor argues that the conclusion drawn by the critics has not really been established, on the grounds that
the claims made in support of this conclusion are inaccurate
Sauk's work has aesthetic merit
these critics are motivated by antipathy toward Sauk's political ideas
the claims made in support of this conclusion have not been shown to be correct
the claims made in support of this conclusion have not been shown to be relevant to it
0 Comments