Question 132·Hard·Inferences
Literary theorist Daria Okoye argues that readers feel most immersed when a narrative sustains a single, stable perspective and keeps its own artifice out of view. By contrast, devices that draw attention to the act of narration—self-commentary in footnotes, direct address to the reader, typographic interruptions—disrupt immersion and cue readers to evaluate the narrator and the construction of the story. In a late chapter of a memoir, the narrator alternates between “I” and addressing “you,” and embeds footnotes that retroactively revise key events described earlier in the main text. According to Okoye’s logic, this chapter is most likely to ______
Which choice most logically completes the text?
For "According to [theorist]" questions, first restate the theorist’s rule in your own words (what causes what). Then treat the described scenario as an example and ask, “Given this rule, what should happen here?” Decide on the predicted effect before looking closely at the choices. Finally, eliminate any option that contradicts the theorist’s stated logic (for example, claiming increased immersion when the theorist says the technique disrupts immersion) and choose the one that best matches the cause-and-effect relationship laid out in the passage.
Hints
Locate the theorist’s key contrast
Reread the first two sentences. What conditions, according to Okoye, create immersion, and what kind of narrative techniques break that immersion?
Connect the described chapter to those techniques
Which specific devices does the memoir chapter use (think about “you” and the footnotes), and are these listed as immersive or disruptive in Okoye’s description?
Think about reader response, not just form
Given that these devices are said to disrupt immersion, what kind of mindset or stance would readers be pushed into—are they simply getting absorbed in the story, or are they evaluating how and what is being told?
Eliminate answers that contradict Okoye’s logic
Cross out any options that suggest the chapter would increase immersion, simplify interpretation, or make the story feel more like unquestioned fact.
Step-by-step Explanation
Restate Okoye’s main claim
First, focus on what Okoye believes about how readers feel immersed.
- Okoye argues that readers are most immersed when a narrative has one stable perspective and hides its own artifice.
- In contrast, when a text draws attention to the act of narration (through things like footnotes, direct address to the reader, typographic interruptions), that disrupts immersion.
- These disruptive devices cue readers to evaluate the narrator and how the story is built, instead of simply getting lost in the story.
Identify the devices used in the memoir chapter
Now look at the description of the chapter in the memoir.
- The narrator alternates between “I” and addressing “you”. Addressing “you” is a form of direct address to the reader, which Okoye listed as a disruptive device.
- The narrator embeds footnotes that retroactively revise key events described earlier. Footnotes and self-revision are also forms of self-commentary and call attention to the narrative as something being constructed.
- So this chapter clearly uses multiple devices that, by Okoye’s definition, disrupt immersion and highlight the narration itself.
Infer the predicted effect on readers
According to Okoye, those devices have a specific impact on readers.
- Because they disrupt immersion, readers are less likely to just “sink into” the story emotionally as if it were seamless.
- Because they draw attention to the act of narration, readers are prompted to notice and judge how the story is being told and consider the narrator’s role and choices.
- So, the likely effect is that readers won’t fully merge or identify with the narrator; instead, they will step back and assess the narrator and the construction of the memoir.
Match that prediction to the answer choices
Now compare that predicted effect to the options:
- (A) talks about deeper identification and an intimate, confessional tone—the opposite of disrupted immersion.
- (B) says the chapter would streamline focus and remove ambiguities, but revising earlier events adds complexity and calls things into question.
- (C) claims readers would treat it as straightforward fact, but Okoye’s logic is that such devices highlight artifice, not factual certainty.
- (D) says the chapter would lead readers to maintain a critical distance, questioning the narrator’s reliability and the story’s construction, which exactly matches Okoye’s claim about what these devices do.
Therefore, the best answer is D) lead readers to maintain a critical distance, questioning the narrator’s reliability and the story’s construction.