Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT134 S4 P4 Q26 Explanation

Dostoyevsky’s Position on Literature

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

TopicsNon-Author OpinionHumanities

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

During Dostoyevsky’s time there were two significant and opposing directions in Russian literary criticism. One position maintained that art stood high above the present and the everyday, while the radical view maintained that art had a right to exist only if it found its sources in concrete reality, and, through the exposure distinction in principle between fantasy and reality, and reality was far more than the merely tangible.

The radical critics’ demand that reality be depicted “as it is” was meaningless for Dostoyevsky; reality was necessarily shaped by the person who experienced it: what may not be reality for you may be reality for me. The task of the writer was to explode the boundaries of the so-called real world. be so intimately bound up with the real that one almost believes in it.”

The radical critics’ insistence that art must serve a particular political view was for Dostoyevsky the equivalent of assigning to art “a shameful destiny.” A literary work must stand or fall on its “artistic merit,” he explained. The utilitarian claim that the formal aspects of a work were of secondary importance so has fully understood the author’s thoughts. Therefore, artistry is quite simply the ability to write well.”

The radical critics’ requirement that art must at all costs be “useful” to people and society seemed to Dostoyevsky unsatisfactory. How can we know what will show itself to be useful? Can we say with assurance how useful the Iliad has been to humankind? No, Dostoyevsky believed, when it comes to this purpose because we cannot see clearly what paths it may take to become useful.

What this question is testing

Non-Author Opinion

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
26.

Given the information in the passage, Dostoyevsky would have been most likely to agree with which one of the following statements

Answer choices

  1. Correct59% picked this

    Only works of literature that are well written can serve a

    Why this is right

    The word "only" would seem like a red flag, for how strong it is, but taking a glance at all five answers, we see that they all have really strong language. Was there anything in the passage that was very strongly worded? Yes, in the middle of the 3rd paragraph, we see, Only fully realized artistic works could fulfill their goals Work fulfills ? Fully realized writer's goal Not fully ? Doesn't fulfill realized writer's goal What does it mean to be "fully realized"? Dostoyevsky defined it as writing well enough that your reader fully understands your (the author's) thoughts. This answer choice is saying, "If a work of literature isn't well written, then it can't serve a particular political view". This maps onto that contrapositive, "If a work is not fully realized (not written well enough that the reader understands the author's thoughts, then it won't fulfill the writer's goal (for example, the goal of serving a political view)." If we re-read the first four claims of the 3rd paragraph again, the flow / context is part of understanding this less mechanically: - the radicals say that art should serve a particular political view, which D thought was dumb - D was like, "art should be about artistic merit, not serving a view" - In fact, D says, your idea that the #1 think is to serve a political view and that formal aspects (i.e. writing well) is only secondary is gettin' it all twisted. - You can't serve a political view unless you've got your formal aspects done right. Only fully realized works can fulfill their goals. So if your goal is to communicate your politics but you don't write well, then it's not going to do anything anyway.

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

  2. Reversal3% picked this

    Only works of literature that serve a particular political view can be said to

    The conditional we're given in the passage is Only fully realized can fulfill goals This answer is saying Only serve view are well written We can see this is a reversal, because "fully realized" is meant to be a synonym with "well-written", while "fulfill goals" is meant to be a synonym with "serve particular view".

  3. Unknown Relationship5% picked this

    Works of literature that are not well written always attempt to serve a

    The conditional we're given in the passage is if not fully realized ? can't fulfill goals (if not written well) (won't serve polit view) The conditional we're given in this answer is if not fully realized ? attempt to serve (if not written well) political view We don't have anything in the passage that gives us a universal statement like "Every single poorly written piece of literature attempts to serve a political view".

  4. Unknown Relationship13% picked this

    A work of literature that is well written cannot serve any

    The conditional we're given in the passage is if not fully realized ? can't fulfill goals (if not written well) (won't serve polit view) The conditional we're given in this answer is if fully realized ? cannot serve any (if written well) political view In addition to not matching (there are opposite triggers), that's pretty counterintuitive - "Every single well-written book cannot serve any particular political view"?

  5. Unknown Relationship21% picked this

    A work of literature that serves a particular political view cannot

    The conditional we're given in the passage is if not fully realized ? can't fulfill goals (if not written well) (won't serve polit view) The conditional we're given in this answer is if fulfill goals ? not fully realized (if serves view) (not well written) This is almost the contrapositive, but the outcome is still the same as the original trigger; it didn't flip truth values the way it should have. This makes for the same counterintuive claim as (D). In fact, they're identical answers, since one is the contrapositive of the other (so they would have to both be wrong, because there can't be two correct answers).

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