Literary critic Priya Deshpande remarks that labeling a novel as part of the 'migrant literature' genre can be both enabling and constraining: enabling because it elevates marginalized voices in a competitive market, constraining because it primes readers to consume the work primarily for its sociological insight rather than its artistic merit.
Deshpande's stance toward the genre label 'migrant literature' is chiefly one of
- unalloyed enthusiasm, urging broader adoption of the label in publishing
- ambivalence, recognizing simultaneous advantages and drawbacks (correct answer)
- detached neutrality, leaving assessment of the label's impact to market forces
- outright rejection, claiming the label erases individual authorial identities
Explanation: When analyzing an author's stance or attitude in GMAT Reading Comprehension, look for language that reveals complexity rather than absolute positions. Authors of academic or critical writing rarely take extreme stances. Deshpande's position becomes clear through her use of "both enabling and constraining." This balanced structure immediately signals ambivalence—she sees legitimate benefits and drawbacks to the "migrant literature" label. She acknowledges it "elevates marginalized voices in a competitive market" (a clear positive), but also warns it "primes readers to consume the work primarily for its sociological insight rather than its artistic merit" (a clear negative). This dual perspective perfectly captures ambivalence. Choice A is wrong because Deshpande explicitly identifies constraints and problems with the label—this isn't "unalloyed enthusiasm." Choice C mischaracterizes her position as neutral when she actually takes a definitive stance about both benefits and drawbacks. Choice D goes too far; while she identifies problems with the label, she also recognizes its enabling aspects and never calls for outright rejection. The key trap here is confusing a nuanced, balanced view with neutrality or indecision. Deshpande isn't neutral—she has strong opinions about both the positive and negative effects. She's ambivalent, meaning she simultaneously holds conflicting feelings about the same issue. Strategy tip: When GMAT passages present "both X and Y" constructions about advantages and disadvantages, the author's stance is typically ambivalent rather than neutral. Look for this pattern to quickly identify balanced but committed positions.