LSAT PrepTest 43 Section 1 Question 15 Explanation | Reading Comprehension

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***


Here's a Reading Comprehension (RC) question from the June 2004 LSAT.

Let's recall the summaries:

P. 1 : 2 theories, formalism and reader-response, latter is better

P. 2: Formalism objective; need to see reader/text interaction

P. 3: Reader-response (RR) opens new interpretations

We see that the summary of RR is in the first paragraph, so we'll look back at that (since this is something of an evidence question, although looking back never hurts on any kind of question). Lines 6-12 lay it out well; the reader is the important thing in RR, and the text has no inherent meaning. Let's see which choice applies the idea of the meaning resting with the reader and there being no objective meaning in the text:

A) The opposite of what we want. The approach suggests rejection of RR because it talks about preserving the original meaning. RR holds there is no original, inherent meaning in the text, and that the reader brings all meaning, so there would be nothing to preserve under RR.

B) Wrong for the same reason as A, although it's a little less obvious. This is a bit tricky, but insisting it be played on the original instruments is like trying to preserve the original meaning of the music / text. RR holds there's no inherent meaning to preserve, so this is unsympathetic to RR.

C) Lines 6-12 and 26-31 make clear this is the opposite of what we want. This reader is looking to interpret meanings the author supposedly insert into the text. RR is about putting one's own meanings into the text and not trying to decode what the author meant, so this is unsympathetic to RR.

D) The opposite of what we want. The author is trying to convey meaning and hoping readers decode it rather than creating their own meanings. This is at odds with RR. Also, RR is about different perspectives (line 59), and this uses the same old symbols.

E) Correct. This is about opening new perspectives on a literary work and not thinking that there is some inherent, universal interpretation left in the text by the author, as formalists do. Shakespeare obviously couldn't have left anything relating to 19th century Japan in his text for readers to decode. This is a new perspective inviting readers to make new interpretations. So, this is sympathetic to RR.

Remember:

1) Look back at the passage, especially on questions requiring knowledge of evidence.

2) Eliminate choices that are the opposite of what we're looking for (in this case, choices that imply opposition to RR rather than sympathy toward it).