Question

The author's primary purpose in the passage is to

• A. explain some critics' refusal to consider \textit{Raisin in the Sun} a deliberately ironic play
• B. suggest that ironic nuances ally \textit{Raisin in the Sun} with Du Bois's and Fanon's writings
• C. analyze the fundamental dramatic conflicts in \textit{Raisin in the Sun}
• D. emphasize the inclusion of contradictory elements in \textit{Raisin in the Sun}
• E. affirm the thematic coherence underlying \textit{Raisin in the Sun}
• A. The world is certainly flat; therefore, the person proposing to sail around it is unquestionably foolhardy.
• B. Radioactivity cannot be directly perceived; therefore, a scientist could not possibly control it in a laboratory.
• C. The painter of this picture could not intend it to be funny; therefore, its humor must result from a lack of skill.
• D. Traditional social mores are beneficial to culture; therefore, anyone who deviates from them acts destructively.
• J. Filmmakers who produce documentaries deal exclusively with facts; therefore, a filmmaker who reinterprets particular events is misleading us.
• A. In \textit{Raisin in the Sun}, Lorraine Hansberry does not reject integration or the economic and moral promise of the American dream; rather, she remains loyal to this dream while looking, realistically, at its incomplete realization.
• B. Once we recognize this dual vision, we can accept the play's ironic nuances as deliberate social commentaries by Hansberry rather than as the "unintentional" irony that Bigsby attributes to the work.
• C. Indeed, a curiously persistent refusal to credit Hansberry with a capacity for intentional irony has led some critics to interpret the play's thematic conflicts as mere confusion, contradiction, or eclecticism.
• D. Isaacs, for example, cannot easily reconcile Hansberry's intense concern for her race with her ideal of human reconciliation.
• O. But the play's complex view of Black self-esteem and human solidarity as compatible is no more "contradictory" than Du Bois's famous, well-considered ideal of ethnic self-awareness coexisting with human unity, or Fanon's emphasis on an ideal internationalism that also accommodates national identities and roles.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This question asks for the main purpose of the passage. We need to identify the author's central argument and the overall goal of the text.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The author starts by establishing Hansberry's "dual vision." Then, the author argues against critics (like Bigsby and Isaacs) who see the play's complexities as "unintentional," "confusion, contradiction, or eclecticism." The author's main effort is to refute this view.
The final sentence provides the core of the author's counter-argument: the play's complex view is "no more 'contradictory'" than the respected ideas of Du Bois and Fanon. By showing that what critics call a contradiction is actually a "complex view" and thematically consistent (like Du Bois's work), the author is defending the play's unity and intellectual integrity.
Thus, the primary purpose is to argue that the play is not confused or contradictory, but is in fact thematically coherent.
Analyzing the Options:
(A) The author does explain this, but it's a step in their larger argument, not the main purpose. The main purpose is to refute those critics.
(B) The comparison to Du Bois and Fanon is the final piece of evidence, not the primary purpose. It's a tool to achieve the main goal.
(C) The passage discusses thematic conflicts but does not analyze them in detail; it defends their coherence.
(D) The author argues against the idea that the elements are "contradictory." They argue for a "complex view," not contradiction.
(E) This is the best summary of the author's goal. They are affirming that beneath the apparent conflicts lies a coherent and deliberate theme, refuting critics who see only confusion.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The author's main goal is to defend \textit{Raisin in the Sun} against charges of thematic confusion, thereby affirming its underlying coherence.

Answer 2

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This is an analogy question. We need to understand the flawed logic of the critics mentioned in sentence three and find an answer choice that exhibits the same type of flawed reasoning.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The critics' reasoning is as follows:

Premise (often unstated and flawed): They have a "refusal to credit Hansberry with a capacity for intentional irony." They assume she is not capable of complex, deliberate artistry.
Observation: They observe "thematic conflicts" in her play.
Conclusion: Because they deny her the capacity for intention, they conclude that these conflicts must be a mistake— "mere confusion, contradiction, or eclecticism."
In short, their logic is: "This artist could not have intended this complex effect; therefore, the effect must be an accident or a flaw."
Analyzing the Options:
(A) This is a conclusion based on a false premise, but the structure is different. It's a simple deduction, not an interpretation of an artwork.
(B) This is a faulty inference about capability based on perception. It's similar, but not as close as (C).
(C) This perfectly matches the critics' logic:

Premise (flawed assumption): "The painter of this picture could not intend it to be funny." (This is like the refusal to credit Hansberry with intentional irony).
Observation: The picture is humorous.
Conclusion: "therefore, its humor must result from a lack of skill." (This is like interpreting the conflicts as "mere confusion").
This is the exact same pattern of denying artistic intent and attributing an observed effect to incompetence.
(D) This is a value judgment leading to a conclusion, not an interpretation of art.
(E) This reasoning is based on a definition of a genre (documentary), not an assumption about an artist's capability.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The logic in option (C) is the most analogous to the reasoning of the critics, as both are based on a flawed assumption about the artist's lack of intention, leading to a misinterpretation of their work as flawed.

Answer 3

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
This question asks us to identify the sentence that contains specific examples used to counter a critical argument. We need to trace the author's argument and pinpoint where they bring in outside evidence or analogies to make their case.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
Sentence (C) introduces the critical response the author wants to refute: the view that the play's conflicts are "mere confusion, contradiction, or eclecticism."
Sentence (D) gives a specific example of this critical response, citing the critic Isaacs.
The author's argument against this critical response starts with "But" at the beginning of sentence (E).
Sentence (E) contains the counter-argument. It argues that the play's complex view is not contradictory. To reinforce this point, it provides two specific examples of respected thinkers whose ideas are similarly complex but not considered contradictory: Du Bois and Fanon. These examples are used to show that combining racial self-awareness with human unity is a coherent and valid intellectual position, thus defending Hansberry's play from the charge of confusion.
Step 3: Final Answer:
Sentence (E) is the one that provides the examples (Du Bois and Fanon) to reinforce the author's argument against the critical response mentioned earlier (in sentence C and D).