Asked by Quandra

Which option presents a complete and effective evaluation of Dan DeLuca's argument in his article "Dylan's Nobel Prize Settles Debate: Rock Lyrics Are Poetry"?

According to DeLuca, Dylan deserved the Nobel Prize for Literature. He was the first American since 1993 to win it and was one of President Obama's favorite poets. Since he was at the height of his popularity in the 1960s, this award shows that his influence has stood the test of time. This claim is valid because President Obama is a fan.
DeLuca believes that rock lyrics must be recognized as poetry because legendary singer-songwriter Bob Dylan has been awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. In doing so, the Nobel committee has recognized the value of Dylan's words, which have spoken for and inspired generations since the 1960s. DeLuca uses credible facts and research to support his claim.
According to Dan Deluca, Bob Dylan was an unlikely choice for the Nobel Prize for Literature. Many experts refuse to believe that song lyrics are poetry, and the odds against Dylan winning the award were high. DeLuca also points out that the award has little monetary value in comparison with Dylan's wealth.
Dan DeLuca is a fan of Bob Dylan's lyrics. He seems to know them by heart and quotes from many songs in his article. He also recognizes Dylan's influence on other artists, such as the novelist Salman Rushdie, the singer-songwriter Bruce Springsteen, and many rap artists, who imitate Dylan's use of internal rhyme.

Answers

There are no human answers yet.
Answered by GPT-5 mini
Option 4.

It evaluates DeLuca’s argument rather than just restating it or committing the same flaws. It notes his evident enthusiasm (possible bias), points out his use of textual evidence (quoting songs), and acknowledges that he documents Dylan’s influence on other writers and musicians — all relevant to judging how persuasive his case is. The other choices either summarize without evaluation (3), rely on a weak appeal to authority (1), or make an unsubstantiated claim about DeLuca’s use of “credible facts and research” without support (2).