Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Medium

PT134 S4 P4 Q27 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
27.

The passage suggests that Dostoyevsky’s attitude toward the radical critics’ view would be most softened if the radical

Answer choices

  1. Opposite3% picked this

    draw a sharper distinction between reality and fantasy when evaluating the content of

    Dostoyevsky blurs the line between reality and fantasy, thinking that they are both part of "reality", so he would actually draw less of a distinction.

  2. Opposite9% picked this

    put clarity of purpose ahead of formal aspects when evaluating a

    Dostoyevsky wants to put formal excellence ahead of "purpose / serving a particular political view". He thinks that we should first worry about whether it was written well (the formal aspects) and only secondarily what its purpose was.

  3. Opposite15% picked this

    acknowledge the importance of eliminating elements of concrete reality from

    Both Dostoyevsky and the radical critics agreed that "reality was literature's crucial source".

  4. Correct70% picked this

    recognize the full significance of artistic merit when evaluating

    Why this is right

    This gets at the 3rd paragraph, in which the radical critics are saying "art must serve a particular political view". Dostoyevsky calls this "a shameful destiny" (so we were right to think that of all his complaints about the radical critics, this one was the one the question stem was targeting, since it's the harshest view and thus the most in need of softening). He responds to them by explaining, "No, a literary work must stand or fall on its artistic merit!" The rest of that 3rd paragraph unpacks his idea that the ability to write well is of #1 performance, because without that it doesn't matter what your political message is. Since he pushes back against their claim that "art must serve a political view" by saying, "[No], a literary work must stand or fall on its artistic merit", he evidently thinks that the radical critics' aren't fully appreciating how important the artistic merit is. Hence, we can support this answer.

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

  5. Unsupported: explain more fully3% picked this

    explain more fully their demand that reality be depicted as

    The beginning of the 2nd paragraph says that the radical critics demand that reality be depicted "as it is" was meaningless for Dostoyevsky. That doesn't mean, "I don't get what you guys mean? Can you explain it more fully? It meant, "Hogwash! There's no such thing as 'reality, as it is', because reality is shaped by each person that experiences it. My reality is different from your reality and always will be."

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