PT40.S3.Q18 - it has been a staple of drama

jmac800

http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-40-section-3-question-18/
Between Answer Choice A and B. I am having some issues.

I am looking at this question thinking ok, Historians do not take the playwrights serious because they exaggerate how bad their own socieities are compared to other societies. So Shakespeare will say English society is evil and french society is meh or good.

This makes A look attractive but B too.
A is a good answer because if playwrights are more critical of their own society than others then they are being inaccurate of their portrayls and it would explain why Historians do not want to use them.

B is good because he is saying playwrights exaggerate the bad for dramatic reasons. The reason I eliminated B was because we do not really know that they exaggerate the "Weakness" of a society or that it is even viewed as a weakness. It does resolve the discrpenancy kind of but I felt A was way way stronger answer.

A says explicitly why historians don't take it serious and it resolves both issues. Historians don't take it serious because the playwrights are just more critical and the playwrights want you to empathisize so they are more critical of their own society.

NYC12345

@jmac800
The stimulus does not mention "other societies;" therefore, "A" does not explain the discrepancy. "B" is a great answer choice because it reveals historians' disapproval for the fact that plays exaggerate about how empathetic the society was.

NYC12345

Moreover, the argument structure implies that the reason for the historians' disapproval is because the play attempts to invoke empathy.

jmac800

The above is not a bad answer, but I need a more concrete reason. If I had no reason why B was right that would help, but I can see how they are both right.

NYC12345

@jmac800
How can "A" possibly be right? The stimulus says nothing about other societies. Furthermore, the argument states, "since the play attempts to invoke empathy, historians do not take the plays seriously."

c.janson35

I look at answer choice A from a slightly different perspective:

Just because playwrights look upon their own societies more critically than other societies doesn't mean that they are offering an insincere portrayal of their societies. What if the playwrights for dramatic effect decided to glamorize all other societies other than their own, but offered a nuanced and realistic portrayal of their own society? Then they would be more critical of their own than the others as A says, but there's nothing to say that this means their portrayals shouldn't be taken seriously--especially if they portrayals are realistic.

Contast this with B, though. B gives you a reason why historians wouldn't take the portrayals seriously--they don't know what's true and what's a dramatic fabrication!

A is tempting you because you're making the assumption that a more critical portrayal of their own country implies that they are giving a slanted or less than truthful portrayal, but this need not be the case.

jmac800

^Your explanation is fairly good, but what about the weaknesses of a society part, I eliminated B on that grounds, we don't know about the alleged weakness or what it would constitute or how that would play into, I thought, well that means B is out of scope. Because in a war like society maybe hostility can be viewed as good!

c.janson35

If they exaggerated the weaknesses of society how could they be serious revelations about the society?

I really don't understand your response above, but looking back at your original post, you misunderstand the task. You raise the issue that we don't know that they exaggerate the weaknesses as B says, but the question stem asks us "which of the following, if true..." so we are taking the choices to be additional factual information.

nye8870

I end up asking a few questions after reading this stimulus: What is the viewpoint of the historians? And … why do they feel this way?
Their viewpoint is “We do not regard these (dramas) as serious revelations of what the societies (presented in these dramas) were really like.” Ok? Why not?
The stimulus says: “They don’t because the playwrights wished their audience to empathize with the protagonist.” Why does that affect your regarding them as revelations….?
Because (B) For the sake of dramatic effect, the playwrights –exaggerate- the weakness…blah, blah.”
I see, so if a play (in this case a drama) exaggerates/distorts reality then it cannot be regarded as any sort of –serious- revelation of …”
(A) More critical/ less critical does not prevent a play from being regarded as – a serious revelation..

jmac800

Ok thanks guys, that did clarify.