Final answer:
Salman Rushdie proposes that "Commonwealth literature does not exist" should be replaced with "Commonwealth literature is worth studying," emphasizing the evolving and inclusive nature of literature. The correct option is d) "Commonwealth literature is worth studying."
Step-by-step explanation:
In the essay in question, the author, Salman Rushdie, challenges the traditional boundaries and the very definition of what constitutes Commonwealth literature.
Rather than agreeing with any notion that suggests its obsolescence or demise, Rushdie's argument leads to a different conclusion: that literature, as an ever-evolving field, remains vibrant and is continually reshaped by various influences, including postcolonial perspectives and the digital age.
It would be a logical inference that Rushdie proposes the statement "Commonwealth literature does not exist" should be replaced with the option d) "Commonwealth literature is worth studying."
This aligns with the idea expressed in the various text excerpts which imply literature should be seen as a spectrum, reflects societal values and changes, celebrates increased inclusivity, and remains relevant and exciting for study today.
Rushdie, like other thinkers such as Virginia Woolf, views literature as a potent force capable of both reflecting and shaping reality.
He implies that, rather than succumbing to the idea of Commonwealth literature being an outmoded notion, we should recognize the ever-fluid and vibrant nature of literature that adapts to cultural shifts and integrates diverse voices from around the globe. The correct option is d) "Commonwealth literature is worth studying."