Q2

[adarsh.murthy]

I dont find any details in the passage that suggest that political and psychoanalytical interpretations are complementary. Can you please help me identify what leads to this conclusion? Thanks!

[maryadkins]

I'd say the key text supporting answer (B) is in lines 9-10 (she sought not only to explore her own roots but also to champion Mexico's political struggle) and lines 33 through 38 (her art speaks to her personal life and to Mexico's political struggle). By saying that Kahlo and her art deal with both, we can infer that the author believes them to be complementary. As for the rest...

(A) is unsupported. There isn't text supporting that there is conflict or tension between the interpretations. One way of interpreting is just more common than the other (lines 6-7).

(C) is also unsupported. There is no mention of revision at all.

(D) is contradictory. The political interpretations described in paragraphs two and three draw heavily on her biography.

(E) is contradictory as well. We're told in line 60 that she's a mythical figure. This comes as part of the discussion about the political and cultural significance of her work.

Hope this helps clarify!

[adarsh.murthy]

I guess it is a bit subjective. Strictly following the definition of Complementary, if a person suppports and believes in A and B, would not necessarily mean A complements B or vice-versa. The trouble is that most of the times LSAT does in fact take the words strictly for their definition and in that case this answer choice, as far as I see, would be a trap answer. Thanks anyways!

[maryadkins]

Definitely a fair point. I think there is still a takeaway here, which is that this is why it's so important on reading comp to work from "wrong to right." Taking issue with the definition of a word is a good tool to eliminate an answer choice, but if it's still better than the other 4, it's probably right despite what you see as the questionable use of a term.