by noah Thu Apr 18, 2013 2:08 pm
We're asked about what the author thinks is wrong with Frijda's idea about what role imagination plays in our aesthetic response. For this, we should refer to the last paragraph, where we see the author supporting Scruton's criticism of Frijda's idea (lines 55-59). In short, knowing that you're pretending is part of having an emotional response to art, suggesting that Frijda is ignoring this. (C) is thus supported.
(A) is out of scope--unselfconsciousness?
(B) is referencing material from the wrong part of the passage. That part is about different theories. Tricky!
(D) is out of scope.
(E) is very tempting but is too strong. While the author criticizes Frijda for ignoring the fact that we have to know we're imagining to have an emotional response to art, we don't hear the author say that Frijda thinks there's no difference between real and illusory stimuli. Frijda may think the do have different properties, but that we then treat the illusory ones as if they're real.
That clear it up?