Writers of detective fiction often include an incompetent detective as a foil for the brilliant investigator-protagonist as they follow different paths in trying to solve the crime. In the individual accounts, the incompetent detective is frequently distracted by the culprit's careful plans, while the competent investigator solves the case after a final confrontation. Analysts of such fiction believe that the authors select this story-telling technique to provide readers with more complexities in the form of misleading clues, while figuring out the crime. Which of the following statements most logically follows from the passage above?
Writers often use an incompetent detective as a foil to a brilliant investigator. This narrative contrast is employed to introduce complexities and misleading clues. The primary purpose is to challenge readers in figuring out the crime.
The passage highlights detectives following different paths, which can be interpreted as the basis for two investigative accounts.
The author's intentional inclusion of misleading clues and heightened complexities through these contrasting accounts directly contributes to making it difficult for the reader to figure out the outcome.
This logical connection explains why writers utilize this technique to enhance the puzzle and challenge for the audience.
“Here was I, the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed native crowd-seemingly the leading actor of the piece; but in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind. I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys. He becomes a sort of hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalised figure of a sahib."
What condition(s) is/are illustrated in the above lines from George Orwell's essay "Shooting an Elephant"?