Reading Comprehension

PT154 · S3 · P2 · Q10 Literary Falsehoods

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

Passage A The path a historical novelist has to tread is clearly beset by dangers.

Topic

The necessity and complexity of "lying" (inventing or altering facts) in historical novels and autobiographical writing.

Framework

Present Debate (both passages wrestle with the tension between truth and invention in writing about the past).

Main Point

Both passages argue that factual inaccuracies—what they call "lies"—are sometimes necessary and even desirable for writers of historical novels (Passage A) or autobiographies (Passage B), as these "lies" can enhance narrative, character, and emotional truth. However, both also express that there's a line between productive invention and unintentional errors or misleading distortions. - Most Valuable Sentences: - Passage A: (End of P1) - Passage B: (P3)

P1A: The Dilemma for Historical Novelists

Writers of historical novels face a challenge: being completely accurate means unreadable or dull books, so they must invent dialogue and details to bring characters to life, which means "telling lies" to some extent.

P2A: Distinguishing Lies from Mistakes

It's important to differentiate between intentional "lies" (deliberate creative liberties) and accidental mistakes (unforgivable inaccuracies). Good historical fiction uses constructive "lies" to serve the story; mistakes harm it.

P3A: Lying Done Well (Shakespeare as Model)

Not all lies are acceptable—some are too obvious or off-putting—but well-done lies are necessary. Shakespeare intentionally distorted facts for emotional impact, which made his plays memorable.

10.

Which one of the following most accurately describes how the passages are related to each other?

Passage A describes an approach
Opposite: Not Adversarial
The central message of the two passages align: to write your stuff well, you're gonna need to lie a little bit.
1% picked this
Passage A outlines a set
Fails B: No Specific Case
Both authors outline general principles for their respective fields of writing. This answer would have been correct if Passage B were writing a story set in Ancient Greece and deciding that Socrates, instead of drinking the hemlock and dying a noble death, persuaded his accusers to set him free.
5% picked this
Passage A and passage B
Opposite: not opposing
The two authors come to the same general conclusion that a little bit of lying is actually needed in order to write good material in their respective genres.
4% picked this
Correct
Passage A and passage B
Why this is right
The arguments are parallel (some lying is needed to make the story better), but apply them to somewhat different contexts (historical fiction vs. autobiography)
Skill tested: Method · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
78% picked this
Passage A and passage B
Weaker Match: conflicting interpretations
This is somewhat tempting in the sense that Passage B has a moment of feeling more emotionally conflicted about her interpretation that "Lying = good thing". But that emotional reluctance lasts only one sentence. She then immediately pivots with a "Nonetheless" back into agreeing with the same principles as Passage A.
12% 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