Great questions,
deegonz06!
First, your understanding of "iconoclastic" is totally spot on - and Haraway is certainly seeking to overthrow traditions! The problem you're having is not one of relevance, but
scope.
Haraway has a number of views which might be considered to be iconoclastic. The language reflection you note in
(D) makes it a solid potential answer
for a different question: namely, a more general question about Haraway's iconoclastic view. But this question is not asking us a general question about her iconoclasticism, but rather a very specific question about the iconoclastic view mentioned in Line 32.
Now, the 'no unified/comprehensive reality' view is mentioned immediately before, while the 'control nature = masculinist/colonialist preconception' view is a bit further up the paragraph, but this alone would not be a surefire reason to pick
(A) over
(D). Instead, we need to look carefully at the entire sentence the quote resides in:
"This iconoclastic view is reflected in Haraway's unorthodox writing style."
Note that the sentence doesn't simply say "her iconoclastic views", but rather "this iconoclastic view" - the pronoun 'this' calls back to something, and it will often call back to something that was mentioned immediately prior (where we find the 'no unified/comprehensive reality' view). But even more importantly, we see that whatever iconoclastic view we're referring to, it's
reflected in her writing style.The very next sentence expands on that introduced idea, and describes Haraway's writing style as having "many different elements" that "remain distinct voices" instead of "succumb[ing] to a master narrative" or "one unified, overarching" story line.
If this writing style is reflective of the iconoclastic view from line 32, we
have to be talking about the 'no unified/comprehensive reality' view! It matches those stylistic elements perfectly, and
(A) reflects exactly that view.
Whenever you have a short quote that you are, essentially, being asked to define, reading the entire sentence for context is key. Start there, and work your way out, paying attention to the context markers. I think that you might have, on untimed review, allowed yourself to broaden your scope out entirely too much, forgetting to tie yourself to the usage of the phrase
in that particular sentence.For the sake of future students, let's take a quick tour of the
other incorrect answers:
(B) Haraway is AGAINST a "unified/overarching Story of Primatology"
(C) This is a view of Haraway's, and might be iconoclastic, but it's discussed way up at the top of paragraph 2, and nothing indicates that this is the same view mentioned in line 32.
(D) As mentioned above, and like (C), this is also a view of Haraway's, and might be iconoclastic, but is mentioned significantly further up in paragraph 2, with no indication that that this is the same view mentioned in line 32.
(E) Haraway never claims that scientists have never succeeded at breaking out of the narrative/causal binary. Lines 40-42 simply note that the fragmented approach presents an alternative to that binary, not that the binary has never been escaped. (Also, the author never indicates what Haraway's views on that binary are.)
Remember, when you're given a quote, start from that sentence and see if that context points you anywhere, so that you can maintain the right scope!
Please let me know if this clears up the confusion!