Question

literary scholars have struggled with the vastness of nigerian writer wole soyinkas collective works of drama (spanning over 20 plays in total). it is best, however, to understand soyinkas body of work as a dramatist chronologically. soyinkas progression as a playwright can be considered to fall into three periods, with each one representing a particular thematic and stylistic cohesion: the 1960s, the two decades between 1970 and 1990, and lastly, from roughly 1990 onwards. text 2 it is tempting to impose a linear sense of order on the expanse of wole soyinkas body of work as a dramatist. however, critics who have considered soyinkas plays to fit neatly into three phases overlook potential commonalities in soyinkas work that span across these phases. additionally, this view may discount significant differences in the styles and content of plays written around the same time. which choice best describes a difference in how the author of text 1 and the author of text 2 view the study of soyinkas works of drama? choose 1 answer: a although the author of text 1 claims that soyinkas style as a dramatist has evolved over time, the author of text 2 argues that soyinkas style has remained consistent throughout his career. b the author of text 1 considers soyinkas plays to showcase his strongest writing, whereas the author of text 2 believes that soyinkas poetry is where he is most skilled. c while the author of text 1 believes that thinking about soyinkas works of theater in phases is useful, the author of text 2 views such an approach as limiting. d the author of text 1 argues that soyinkas early plays were his most politically charged, whereas the author of text 2 claims that soyinkas most recent plays are the most political.

Explanation:

Text 1 suggests understanding Soyinka's work chronologically in phases. Text 2 criticizes the idea of neatly - fitting his works into phases, seeing it as limiting as it may overlook cross - phase commonalities and differences in same - time works.

Answer:

C. While the author of Text 1 believes that thinking about Soyinka's works of theater in phases is useful, the author of Text 2 views such an approach as limiting.