Why does the author mention reputations that were made and unmade?
It is sometimes said that critics are people who could not create. The jibe is old and unfair. Criticism asks for a different skill: to see what a work is attempting, to judge how far it succeeds and to explain the judgement so that others can test it. A good critic makes us look again, and may change our view of a work we thought we knew. A critic also provides a service that artists cannot supply for themselves, a view from outside. But critics are fallible. Reputations have been made, and unmade, by judgements that later generations found absurd. The wise reader treats a critic as a guide whose reasons are worth weighing, and not as an authority whose verdicts must be accepted.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: D. To show that critics' judgements can prove mistaken
- Step 1: The sentence says such judgements were later found absurd.
- Step 2: That illustrates critics' fallibility.
Answer
To show that critics' judgements can prove mistaken.
Why not the others: Reputations made and unmade show that critics can be mistaken, not that they are dishonest, that artists are never fairly judged, that later generations know less or that reputations do not matter.
Practise more Arts.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed LNAT mock tests.