Reading Comprehension

PT137 · S1 · P1 · Q7 Lorenzo Tucker

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

  • 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

Start practicing free

Until my present study, African American entertainer Lorenzo Tucker had not been extensively discussed in histories of United States theater and film.

Topic

Lorenzo Tucker’s contributions to African American theater and film, and the process of creating his career biography.

Framework

Highlight Noteworthy (With elements of Answer / Explain—explaining the approach and challenges of the biography)

Main Point

Lorenzo Tucker was an influential but understudied figure in American entertainment, and this study uses a careful blend of oral and documentary evidence to create his career biography, thereby addressing a gap in historical scholarship. The Most Valuable Sentence: (End of P4)

P1: Introducing Tucker and His Significance

We’re told that Lorenzo Tucker made major contributions to theater and film over sixty years, yet he hasn’t received much scholarly attention. The author collected memorabilia and personal memories from Tucker himself, aiming to shed new light on a neglected corner of U.S. entertainment history.

P2: Methods and Sources for the Study

The author explains the variety of sources used to research Tucker’s life, including library archives, interviews with fellow performers, viewing Tucker’s films, and especially personal interviews with Tucker.

P3: Pros and Cons of Biographing a Living Person

Here the author discusses the benefit of being able to interview the subject directly, but also the bias and unreliability that comes with personal memory, which means careful corroboration is necessary.

7.

Information in the passage most strongly supports which one of the following inferences regarding the text that this passage introduces?

  1. It assesses well-known African American

    Unsupported: conflicts with previous

    This study says it will be examining an area of U.S. entertainment history that has been underexamined (insufficient scholarship). It's not setting out to go against the grain of how critics have previously viewed well-known films. It's setting out to inform about not-well-known films.

    15% picked this

  2. It was written by a

    Unsupported: participated with Tucker

    We have no evidence that the biographer ever appeared in any theatrical ventures with Tucker (or anyone else).

    4% picked this

  3. It was written by a

    Unsupported: expects to be obscure

    This author is writing about an under-examined topic, something that has been outside mainstream scholarship concerning U.S. film and theater history. But we have no way to support the idea that the author expects to be regarded as a non-mainstream participant. We would assume this author takes herself and her scholarship seriously and expects to be recognized as a professional biographer, like other mainstream historians.

    24% picked this

  4. Correct

    Its analysis of Tucker's acting

    Why this is right

    This is the sort of correct answer on Inference questions that is just testing technicalities of language. It's not an important idea; it's just a provable idea. In the middle of the 2nd paragraph, in the sentence beginning with "Also examined --", we're told that the primary source material for analyzing Tucker's acting technique were the ten still available films in which he appeared. Are ten films a preponderance of the films in which Tucker performed? First of all, what the F does preponderance mean? It basically means "a majority" in this case. Criminal courts use a standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" to convict. Civil courts use a standard of "a preponderance of the evidence" to convict. It means that the prosecution has convinced the court that the defendant is more likely than not guilty (more than 50% chance). So ... how many films did Tucker perform in? In the first paragraph, we were told "he acted (i.e. performed) in 20". Is 10 most of 20? No, 11 or higher would be most of 20. So if this primary evidence for analysis of Tucker's acting were 10 out his 20 films, then the analysis is not based on a preponderance of his 20 films. Do you hate this test / your life yet?

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

    31% picked this

  5. Its rhetorical structure is not

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: rhetorical structure Too Specific: majority We wouldn't be able to say anything, from this passage, about what's true of 51% or more of previously scholarly biographies of African American performers. I guess we could say a majority of them didn't focus on Lorenzo Tucker. :) The author is saying her focus is an area of insufficient scholarship, but she's not saying her rhetorical structure is different from those of most previous African American biographies.

    26% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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