LSAT 73 Sect 2 Q10 (RC) Forum

[tinawoo]

I chose B on this question and am still struggling to understand why it is wrong. Could anyone explain it for me? I'm also confused where the correct answer D comes from.


Thank you in advance!

[bpolley0]

I apologize but for LSAT 73 I show section 2 is Logical Reasoning. Is this the question you are looking for the one about Bertolt Bretcht's plays?

[tinawoo]

Sorry about the confusion! I guess the sequence is different for different test takers. This was a real test for me and my RC section was the second. The question I'm asking is in a passage about the photographer Cameron.

[mornincounselor]

Post removed.

[tinawoo]

Sure, so it is a local inference question. It wants us to say why it is that this claim is true. The claim of course is that (starting in line 34) with narrative paintings we can suspend our disbelief while with narrative photography we cannot. So there must be something inertly different between the two art forms. So the correct choice will identify something which seperates photography from painting, and it must be something that is implied from the passage which helps us to explain this concept.

Let's keep reading (line 36) in photography we are always aware that it is a real person portraying another person. (This is something true of narrative photography but not narrative paintings.)


(B) Okay so yes, this is a true statement. A half man half porcupine is very hard to accurately photograph but much easier to paint, this is an example of a time when we can better suspend our disbelief if the medium is a painting. So if the question asked to give an example of something similiar to what the passage is describing by "suspension of disbelief" this choice would be pretty good. But, the question is asking us to explain why this phenomen exists.

(D) See how this explains a tactic a painter can use to make their work more believable. Going back to the passage, a "baby jesus" in a photograph giving us looks of "frank hatred" would tend to make us believe the photo is not really of baby jesus. But, a painter could suppress this, therby helping us to suspend our disbelief.

Thanks a lot!