Book Review - Inference

[charu_mulye]

Book Review: When I read a novel set in a city I know well, I must see that the writer knows the city as well as I do if I am to take that writer seriously. If the writer is faking, I know immediately and do not trust the writer. When a novelist demonstrates the required knowledge, I trust the story teller, so I trust the tale. This trust increases my enjoyment of a good novel. Peter Lee’s second novel is set in San Francisco, in this novel, as in his first, Lee passes my test with flying colors.

Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the passage?

(A) The book reviewer enjoys virtually any novel written by a novelist whom she trusts.
(B) If the book reviewer trusts the novelist as a storyteller, the novel in question must be set in a city the book reviewer knows well.
(C) Peter Lee’s first novel was set in San Francisco.
(D) The book reviewer does not trust any novel set in a city that she does not know well.
(E) The book reviewer does not believe that she knows San Francisco better than Peter Lee does.

Posting just a good question, I got this one correct though.
OA will follow.

[JustMe123]

is it C?

[r4rohini]

very close b/w B and C..
and on exam day i would pick C coz of "Peter Lee’s second novel is set in San Francisco, in this novel, as in his first, Lee passes my test with flying colors."

but y cant it be B? is it coz B is more general? and v need specific inference here? i eliminated B coz of this reason...

Post the OA soon

[charu_mulye]

Why no body else attempting this Q?
This is BTW good Q.
ll post OA tomm.

[Piyushjain]

I think it is A.
Post the OA.

[nagar]

hey Charu nice question yaar...i took almost 6 minutes but i wud say it shud be E

E satisfies both the condition that novel shud be good and in sync with Peter.

[charu_mulye]

Good Job nagar, OA is E.
You are going to perform well....

Even I took relatively long time on this one, 3.5 mins. as it shows in grid

[aarushi2001]

nice question

[avikar]

E for me.