What position do the defenders of 'art for art's sake' take?
In the seventeenth century, French writers often repeated a principle borrowed from the ancients: a work should both please and instruct. The theatre of Molière and the tragedies of Racine were meant to entertain an audience while showing the dangers of vices and passions. Later writers questioned this balance. Some, in the eighteenth century, gave priority to instruction, using tales and essays to spread the ideas of the Enlightenment. In the nineteenth century, defenders of 'art for art's sake' replied that a poem needs no moral purpose and that beauty is enough. Today, readers still disagree. Some look in books for a lesson, others for pleasure, and many for both. The disagreement is perhaps less a conflict than a reminder that literature serves several needs at once.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: C. That a poem needs no moral purpose
- Step 1: The passage reports their reply. Step 2. They say beauty is enough. Answer: beauty is enough. Why not the others: these are the opposing views.
Practise more Lecture de textes.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed French Baccalaureat mock tests.
More Lecture de textes questions
- What is the main idea of the passage about the reader at the theatre?
- According to the passage, why does Madame Roche sit in the third row?
- What does the comparison 'the way other people watch the sea' suggest about the way she watches the stage?
- Which detail does the passage suggest is the cause of her lowered eyes?
- What does the actor's last statement imply about comedy?
- What is the main idea of the passage about teaching and pleasing?