Q6

[jardinsouslapluie5]

Is (D) wrong because the "exclusion of other important elements?"

[ohthatpatrick]

Which paragraph would we look to for where Posner explains why "legal analysis is not generally useful in interpreting literature"?

[answer this yourself before reading on]

The second. The topic sentence there matches these keywords very well.

So what's the big idea of the 2nd paragraph? Why isn't legal analysis helpful to interpret literature?

[answer this yourself before reading on]

In lines 22-27, it says that law is used in literature only loosely, as a metaphor. "Legal questions, per se, are seldom at issue".

Posner's basically saying that legal analysis isn't helpful because literature doesn't really concern itself with legal questions.

You're right about (D); the part about "excluding other important elements" is not discussed in the 2nd paragraph. If Posner had said, "the trouble with lawyers analyzing literature is that the lawyers are so focused on examining legal issues that they fail to appreciate other important aspects of the novel", then this would be a good answer.

=== other answers ===

(A) this isn't ideal, but we could match up "generally of a quite different nature than use of the law in legal practice" with lines 22-27. Lawyers certainly don't use the law "loosely to convey a particular idea, or as a metaphor".

(B) tempting match here. The author said that legal issues are SELDOM raised in literature, and this answer says that law is RARELY used to convey important ideas. But those two ideas are very different. In fact, (B) is contradicted by the lines we were just looking at. Posner thinks that, in literature, the law is often used to convey important ideas, but the ideas are loose, metaphorical ideas, not strictly legal issues.

(C) nothing about training in the 2nd paragraph.

(E) nothing distinguishing contemporary literature or justifying the extreme term "only".

Hope this helps. This is a good example of why it's important to find the "window of proof" for a given question. We know that the answer to this question is coming from lines 22-27. (A) is not the greatest answer, but it is the closest thing we're offered that reinforces something said in lines 22-27.

[inesa909]

I'm still a little fuzzy on why B is incorrect. Is it because legal questions are "seldom at issue", but still rather frequently brought up?

[ohthatpatrick]

Try to draw a sharp distinction between the meaning of "rarely used to convey important ideas" and "legal issues are seldom at issue".

Posner would agree that laws and legal situations might play really prominent, important roles in literature. A given law might symbolize the oppressive society in which the protagonist lives (I'm extrapolating from lines 24-25 here).

But the law is used in the book loosely, as a metaphor.

Meanwhile, Posner thinks, lawyers would only have special expertise of literature actually grappled with legal issues ... whether the facts of a certain case merit application of a given statute. Posner is telling us that books rarely create situations of complex legal interpretation.

For example, the laws restricting the freedom of Jim in "Huckleberry Finn" might play a very important role in the novel. But lawyers would not find in "Huckleberry Finn" subtle issues that call into question Jim's legal status under the applicable laws. THAT's what Posner means by "legal issues".

(B) is designed to be the most tempting trap answer, because 'rarely' matches 'seldom' in line 27. But saying that "legal issues (controversies over how to interpret a given law / set of facts) are seldom at issue" is not the same as saying "the law seldom conveys important ideas".

[inesa909]

That really clarified everything. Thanks! Gotta beware of those trap answer choices