Solution
We need to find what "flips the script" means and then see what would destroy that idea.
Let us trace the script flip step by step:
From passage: "For 300 years, scholars thought that the rags-to-riches story of Aladdin might have been inspired by the plots of French fairy tales... The idea that Diyab might have based it on his own life the experiences of a Middle Eastern man encountering the French, not vice-versa flips the script."
The inversion (script flip) is:
- Old idea: French culture influenced the Aladdin story (French -> Middle Eastern story)
- New idea: Diyab's real experiences in France became the Aladdin story (Middle Eastern person's French experiences -> story)
The key evidence for this new idea: Diyab's descriptions of Versailles matched the palace descriptions in Galland's Aladdin version.
To invalidate this inversion -> we need to break the connection between Diyab's life and the Aladdin story.
š Option 1 -> supports-inversion -> If Galland credited Diyab, this would actually strengthen the idea that the story came from Diyab's experiences, not weaken it.
š Option 2 -> supports-inversion -> If French fairy tales lacked rags-to-riches plots, this removes one French influence, making Diyab's life as the source more likely, not less.
š¢ Option 3 -> correctly invalidates -> If Diyab's and Galland's descriptions of luxury were completely different, then the key evidence linking Diyab's Versailles experience to Aladdin's palace disappears. No connection = no proof the story came from Diyab's life.
š Option 4 -> irrelevant detail -> Whether it was Bordeaux or Versailles doesn't matter - Diyab still experienced French luxury, so the story could still be based on his life experiences.
The question asks what would destroy the new theory. Only Option 3 breaks the evidence that connects Diyab's real experiences to the Aladdin story.