Re: It is his dubious distinction to have proved what nobody wo
[#permalink]
15 Feb 2018, 13:58
Explanation
The very first thing to do is to dive into the gist of the problem, or the core, trying to get the real meaning of the sentence; no matter what the complexity of what it is.
Now, the first part of it before the comma, actually, is directing us to what he “proved” is actually something “nobody would think of denying”, which means in a simple gergo: Romero proved something that is irrefutable or thing like that.
After the comma, Romero wrote something with the characteristics of completeness. Honestly, there are not so many clues along the sentence BUT if someone write at an advanced stage of his/her life something that is difficult to disprove. This, in general, is the result of the experience and sagacity - this should lead us to think of something similar in the answer choices.
A) Maturity - maybe we are lucky enough of finding immediately the probable solution. Keep it for now
B) Fiction - we do not have so many info about what he wrote or else. Cross off.
C) Inventiveness - here we are talking about Romero and his writing as a whole in his late stage of life. Nothing suggests us whether his writing is fancy or else.
D) Art - this word does not fit very well with the characteristics.
E) Brilliance - this could be the answer but it is quite similar to the meaning-trap of art. No good.
A is the best of the bill.