Text 1: Literary critic Dr. Sarah Wells analyzes canon formation. "Which works become 'classics' reflects institutional power, not inherent quality," Wells argues. "Publishing, university curricula, and criticism determine what counts as great literature."
Text 2: Literary scholar Dr. James Chen defends literary value. "While institutions shape reputation, some texts genuinely reward sustained attention more than others," Chen contends. "Institutional factors explain circulation, not why certain texts continue to generate insight."
What does Chen suggest Wells's institutional analysis fails to explain?
That institutions don't exist
Why certain texts continue to reward readers across different institutional contexts
That publishing occurs
That all texts are equally valuable
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Wells explains why certain texts circulate. Chen asks why some "continue to generate insight"—why they reward reading across contexts. Enduring value isn't explained by institutional power alone.
- Evidence: Chen: "why certain texts continue to generate insight."
- Reasoning: Persistence of value across contexts suggests something beyond power.
- Conclusion: Continuing insight-generation needs its own explanation.
Choice A is incorrect because Chen accepts institutional influence. Choice C is incorrect because Chen accepts circulation occurs. Choice D is incorrect because Chen distinguishes texts by value.