一个 LSAT

lll123

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
A为什么不对

mindfree

How did you get A from the passage? Where in the passage it says that the trust make the reviewer enjoy the book? "This trust increases my enjoyment of a good novel." From this sentence, I can only conclude that the trust on the novelist can add enjoyment, only if the book is good.

lll123

thank you