Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT121 S3 P2 Q12 Explanation

Gluck’s Poetry

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsAuthor's AttitudeHumanities

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

The poet Louise Glück has said that she feels comfortable writing within a tradition often characterized as belonging only to male poets. About her own experience reading poetry, Glück notes that her gender did not keep her from appreciating the poems of Shakespeare, Blake, Keats, and other male poets. Rather she believed tradition as historically exclusionary and rhetorically inadequate for women, Glück embraces it with respect and admiration.

Glück’s formative encounters with poetry also provided her with the theoretical underpinnings of her respect for this tradition; she notes that in her youth she could sense many of the great themes and subjects of poetry even before experiencing them in her own life. These subjects—loss, the passage of time, desire—are timeless, mortality, for example, then issues of gender distinction fade behind the presence of this universal reality.

Some of Glück’s critics claim that this idea of the universal is suspect and that the idea that gender issues are transcended by addressing certain subjects may attribute to poetry an innocence that it does not have. They maintain that a female poet writing within a historically male-dominated tradition will on some strive to create a uniquely female poetry by using new forms to develop a new voice.

Glück, however, observes that this ambition, with its insistence on an essentially female perspective, is as limiting as her critics believe the historically male-dominated tradition to be. She holds that to the extent that there are some gender differences that have been shaped by history, they will emerge in the differing ways what it includes and in what it omits, inevitably speaks of its social and historical context.

What this question is testing

Author's Attitude

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
12.

Based on the passage, which one of the following most accurately characterizes the author’s attitude toward Glück’s

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong: dismissal2% picked this

    respectful

    The author never made her presence known, so she definitely didn't dismiss Glück's poetry.

  2. Out of Scope: grudging1% picked this

    grudging

    The author never pushes back against Glück's point of view in the slightest. To justify "grudging acceptance", we'd have to point to some point in the passage where the author airs some grievance he has about her poetry but conveys that it isn't a fatal flaw. We don't have any author attitudinal moments anywhere in the passage.

  3. Too Strong: indifference24% picked this

    detached

    This problem overall was mind-blowing to me when I first encountered it. Given that the author is totally invisible, how are we supposed to pick between "detached indifference" (i.e. neutrally described) and "tacit endorsement" (i.e. invisibly accepted)? Ultimately, my logic was related to the structure. There are no sentences that give away the author's intent or view, but his structuring of the passage, because it is intentional, betrays a certain view. Suppose you structure a passage you're writing about Person X this way: 1st P -- Person X has these beliefs 2nd P -- Person X had this upbringing / philosophy 3rd P -- Some of X's critics claim this idea is suspect 4th P -- X, however, observes / holds / points out / maintains Did you want your reader to leave your passage more persuaded by X, more persuaded by the critics, or in ambivalent "make up your own minds" territory? You wanted to leave your reader more persuaded by X. That's why you gave them a chance to respond. The fact that you allowed them space to push back against the critics, but you didn't create any space for you to push back against them, shows that you seem sympathetic to their point of view. We might even tease this answer choice for calling the author indifferent to Glück's view of poetry, given that the author took the time to research and write this paper on Glück's view of poetry. Someone can write in a detached style without being indifferent to the topic.

  4. Correct63% picked this

    tacit

    Why this is right

    "tacit" = unspoken How could LSAT possibly ask us to pick an answer saying "unspoken endorsement", when we're supposed to be supporting all our answers with text from the passage? Agreed. Strangely, it's only happened twice and both times were in this test (passage 1 has a correct answer with implicit acceptance). In both cases, the structure of the essay is what's providing support. When an LSAT author introduces a point of view ... "Some critics claim" and then she gives the last word to a viewpoint that is countering that claim, she's showing that she's implicitly agreeing with that last viewpoint more. Consider the difference in verb choice between how the author refers to the critics' ideas in the 3rd paragraph and how she refers to Glück's ideas in the last paragraph. CRITICS claim / maintain / in their view / feel / insist GLUCK observes / holds / points out / maintains Pretty subtle, but the attributions in the last paragraph feel a little more "I'm on board with this point of view" than do the ones in the 3rd paragraph.

    Skill tested: Author's Attitude · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Too Strong10% picked this

    enthusiastic

    The author is invisible. We can make the case we need to make that the author seems largely positive / sympathetic to Glück, but in a totally invisible way. We definitely need explicit support for a charged-up answer like "enthusiastic praise".

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free