Passage Summary: Some experts say we shouldn't judge books by how 'good' they are because they are just political messages, but then those same experts judge which political messages are 'better' than others, which is basically the same thing.

Conclusion: Literary theorists who claim art is purely ideological end up adopting the aesthetic standards they claim to reject.

Reasoning: These theorists still judge specific works as being more or less 'interesting' or 'successful' as ideological expressions.

Analysis: The claim functions as the 'smoking gun' evidence in the author's argument. It identifies a specific behavior of the theorists that contradicts their stated philosophy. By pointing out that they use evaluative terms like 'interesting' and 'successful,' the author provides the premise necessary to conclude that the theorists are hypocritical. Focus on identifying this as a premise used to show that the theorists' practice is inconsistent with their theory.