Question

Which person or group’s perspective was most fully developed in this article? Use details from the article to explain this person or group’s perspective on the situation. Conclude by explaining a person or group’s perspective that was not fully developed. based on the Poetry and Fiction of the Harlem Renaissance article.

a) The author's perspective is most fully developed, emphasizing the artistic elements.
b) The perspective of the readers is most fully developed, as they interpret the poetry and fiction.
c) The perspective of the poets and fiction writers is most fully developed, showcasing their experiences.
d) The article does not focus on any specific perspective.

Answer 1

Option (b), The perspective most fully developed in the article on the Harlem Renaissance is that of the poets and fiction writers, highlighted by figures like Langston Hughes and Zora Neale Hurston. The least developed perspective is that of the readers or audience's reception of the movement's literature.

Step-by-step explanation:

The person or group’s perspective most fully developed in the article about the Poetry and Fiction of the Harlem Renaissance is that of the poets and fiction writers, specifically showcasing their experiences and contributions during the era. This is evident through the details provided about key figures like Langston Hughes, Zora Neale Hurston, and others who used their works to give voice to African-American heritage and the struggles they faced.

The article discusses how these artists embraced a new spirit of cultural expression that moved away from mirroring European styles to reflecting their own lived experiences and the dynamics of black life in America.

Despite extensive information about the key contributors of the Harlem Renaissance, one perspective that is not fully developed in the article is that of the readers of the time or the contemporary audience's reception and interpretation of the work produced during this movement. While there are mentions of mixed receptions, such as the mainstream black press's response to the literary magazine Fire!!, the general reader's perspective is not expansively explored.