Reading Comprehension

PT137 · S1 · P2 · Q8 !Kung Woman

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

Taking the explication of experience as its object as well as its method, Marjorie Shostak’s Nisa: The Life and Words of a !Kung Woman weaves together three narrative strands, and in doing so challenges the ethnographer’s penchant for the general and the anonymous.

Topic

Marjorie Shostak’s book Nisa: The Life and Words of a !Kung Woman and how it challenges conventions in ethnography by weaving together personal, cultural, and collaborative narratives.

Framework

Challenge Position (critiques typical ethnography and accepted Western views of "simple" societies); Highlight Noteworthy (spotlighting the unique approach and impact of Shostak’s book)

Main Point

Shostak’s Nisa breaks away from traditional, generalizing ethnography by weaving together the individual voice of Nisa, broader reflections on women’s experience, and the author–subject collaboration, thereby challenging both Western ideals of “simple” societies and the usual omission of women’s perspectives. (Most Valuable Sentence: - P1)

P1: Introducing the Book’s Structure and Its Challenge to Ethnography

This paragraph describes how Shostak’s book combines three narrative threads: Nisa’s autobiography, her experiences as a metaphor for women everywhere, and the collaborative encounter between Shostak and Nisa. In doing so, the book pushes back against the usual focus on the generic and the impersonal in ethnography.

P2: Correcting Misconceptions About the !Kung and “Simple Societies”

Here, the passage explains how Nisa’s story complicates the Western tendency to romanticize societies like the !Kung. By sharing gritty details and tragic experiences, Shostak (through Nisa) challenges the “idyllic” view and brings attention to difficult realities.

P3: Elevating Women’s Narratives and Pointing Out Their Usual Absence

This paragraph highlights how Shostak uses Nisa’s life story not just to tell one woman’s tale, but to comment on the broader female experience—a perspective often missing from ethnographic studies.

8.

Shostak's approach to ethnography differs from the approach of most ethnographers in which one of the following ways?

  1. She observes the culture of

    No Support

    We don't have any supporting text for the idea that Shostak is different from most ethnographers by observing the culture of one group in order to infer the cultural traits of a similar group. In fact, it's not even clear that Shostak is doing this.

    4% picked this

  2. She studies the life experiences

    No Support

    We don't have any evidence that Shostak studied the life experiences of individual !Kung apart from their group. Also, we only have two available details about most ethnographers: they like the general / anonymous, and they don't show women's perspective on women.

    16% picked this

  3. She contrasts individuals' personal histories

    No Support

    We only have two available details about most ethnographers: they like the general / anonymous, and they don't show women's perspective on women. This answer isn't saying the opposite of either of those. To pick this answer, we'd need to have read that most ethnographers don't contrast individuals' histories with info about that culture.

    13% picked this

  4. She exemplifies her general hypotheses

    No Support

    We only have two available details about most ethnographers: they like the general / anonymous, and they don't show women's perspective on women. This answer isn't saying the opposite of either of those. To pick this answer, we would have needed to read that most ethnographers don't support their general hypotheses with empirical data (which is a pretty crazy thing to say).

    3% picked this

  5. Correct

    She emphasizes the importance of

    Why this is right

    We only have two available details about most ethnographers: they like the general / anonymous, and they don't show women's perspective on women. This answer is saying the opposite of the first of those. "General and anonymous" would mean that the ethnography would focus on the society at large (general) without naming specific people (anonymous). Meanwhile, Shostak is going for personal/individual, zooming in on Nisa and learning about her specific life. General / anonymous vs. personal / individual

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

    64% picked this

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