- Thu May 14, 2020 12:19 pm
I think the key here is addressing the question from the perspective of Passage B's author. You're right that the process of elimination here is similar to a Point of Disagreement question, but this question is a little more complex than a simple disagreement! The real question here is which of the following principles would NOT provide a good way to assess autobiography.
The key distinction here is in the authors' definitions of "lying." Passage A treats lying as a departure from strict, objective, factual accuracy in historical fiction that makes the story more understandable to a modern reader. Passage B, on the other hand, approaches the distinction between lying and mistakes in a fuzzier way. Passage B's discussion of "false memories" around Line 45 illustrates this well. A false memory (which Passage B's author treats as a powerful way to create "emotional truth") would likely be characterized as a "mistake" by the author of Passage A, since it's unintentional. In other words, strict, objective accuracy just isn't important in writing an autobiography.
It's not that Passage B's author disagrees with Passage A's author about the difference between lies and mistakes. It's that Passage B approaches the concept of lying so differently that the distinction between lies and mistakes is not applicable at all!
Answer Choice (D), on the other hand, is applicable to both historical fiction and autobiography. You're right that Passage B explicitly refers to an author being "convincing" between Lines 50-55, but the reference to subtlety is, well, a bit more subtle! For example, the idea that autobiography "dances" between fact and fiction support the statement that autobiography requires subtlety.