This quote is about true literature that features “fantasy and whimsy.” But the attitude we’re looking for is that true literature is is a bit dull. Nothing about “fantasy and whimsy” sounds dull.

This quote is about literature that’s highly humorous. That sounds like enjoyable literature. The attitude we’re looking for about enjoyable literature is that it’s lowbrow (i.e., not true literature). But this quote doesn’t sound like it’s about about lowbrow writing—if anything, it sounds like it falls on the side of true literature. So this is the wrong attitude.

This quote suggests that best-selling novels sell well for a reason, even if critics look down on them. Keep in mind that the attitude we’re looking for is that enjoyable novels are lowbrow, and true literature is a bit dull. Are the best-selling novels mentioned here lowbrow but enjoyable? Or are they best-selling for being true literature, even if they’re a bit dull? Do critics look down on these novels because they’re lowbrow? We know that critics can actually look down on novels for being highbrow. Since it’s unclear what kind of novels (D) is talking about—enjoyable, dull, lowbrow, true literature—it’s not a good match.

This quote says that all it takes to be true literature is meeting the requirements of a given genre. In other words, meeting those requirements is sufficient for something to be true literature. But the attitude we’re looking for is that something is necessary for a novel to be true literature: it must be a bit dull. (E) doesn’t tell us what’s necessary and it doesn’t suggest that dullness has anything to do with true literature, so it fails on both counts.