Too narrow. This just reshuffles the first sentence of the passage. The author doesn’t argue that Walker was simply widely recognized or acclaimed; in fact, he doesn’t support that claim at all. He simply notes Walker’s acclaim, and then spends the rest of the passage talking about the cakewalk and how Walker was able to popularize the dance.

Anti-supported. The author argues that cakewalk had broad appeal because of its multiple influences, not “in spite of” those influences. Also, the reason (B) gives for Walker’s success is too narrow; authenticity was only one part of what made Walker’s version of the cakewalk so successful. Refinement and flourish were also key.

The main point is how Walker popularized the cakewalk, and (C) is a decent summary of how she did so. The dance had built up a “complex cultural mix” by taking a culturally important dance and blending in satire and parody, which attracted both African American and European audiences. Walker “capitalized” on that diverse audience by helping the cakewalk appeal to different people in different ways.

Unsupported. The author doesn’t suggest that “other versions of the cakewalk... were primarily parodic in nature” or that they didn’t involve cultural preservation.

Inaccurate. The author says that the cakewalk was just one of the first cultural forms to cross the racial divide—we don’t know if it was the first. Also, it wasn’t because of Walker, specifically, that the cakewalk crossed the racial divide; it was because the dance in general parodied European dances.