1) Explanation

Let's break down the sentence blank by blank, looking for logical connections and consistency in meaning.
- Blank (i): "It is (i) $\qquad$ to describe what precisely defines the literary quality of any written work during its time."
- The second sentence begins with "Although many attempts have been made, any contemporary and (ii) $\qquad$ definition is ultimately impossible..." The word "impossible" is a very strong clue. If a definition is ultimately impossible, then the task of describing it precisely must be described by a word that conveys futility or extreme difficulty.
- A. inane: Meaning silly or stupid. This doesn't fit the academic tone or the context of a difficult intellectual task.
- B. feasible: Meaning possible to do easily or conveniently. This is the opposite of what is implied by "ultimately impossible."
- C. hopeless: Meaning impossible to achieve or to succeed. This fits perfectly, aligning with the idea that precisely defining literary quality is "ultimately impossible."

So, Blank (i) is C. hopeless.

- Blank (ii): "Although many attempts have been made, any contemporary and (ii) $\qquad$ definition is ultimately impossible, because one cannot enumerate a work's style, originality, or influence."
- The crucial clue here is "because one cannot enumerate a work's style, originality, or influence." "Enumerate" means to count, list, or specify precisely. If you cannot count or list these aspects, then a definition that relies on such measurement or quantification would be impossible.
- D. quantitative: Meaning relating to or measuring by quantity or number. If you cannot "enumerate" (count/measure), then a "quantitative" definition would logically be impossible. This is a strong fit.
- E. analytical: Meaning relating to or using analysis or logical reasoning. While literary analysis is analytical, the impossibility stated isn't about the act of analysis itself, but the inability to enumerate specific qualities.
- F. subjective: Meaning based on personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. While literary quality can be subjective, the reason given for the impossibility is the inability to "enumerate," which points to a lack of objective, measurable criteria, not just personal opinion. "Quantitative" is a more direct antonym to "cannot enumerate."

So, Blank (ii) is D. quantitative.

- Blank (iii): "Indeed, many works that are now considered 'classics' were widely (iii) $\qquad$ or even simply ignored in their time."
- This part provides evidence for why contemporary definition is difficult. It highlights a contrast between how works are viewed now ("classics") versus how they were viewed in their time. The word "ignored" is a strong parallel clue. The blank needs a word that describes a negative reception or a lack of positive attention.
- G. extolled: Meaning praised enthusiastically. This is the opposite of being ignored or negatively received.
- H. acclaimed: Meaning praised enthusiastically and publicly. Similar to "extolled," this is the opposite of what's needed.
- I. criticized: Meaning indicating the faults of (someone or something) in a disapproving way. This fits perfectly with "ignored," showing a negative or unenthusiastic contemporary reception, contrasting with their later status as classics.

So, Blank (iii) is I. criticized.

Putting It Together:
"It is hopeless to describe what precisely defines the literary quality of any written work during its time. Although many attempts have been made, any contemporary and quantitative definition is ultimately impossible, because one cannot enumerate a work's style, originality, or influence. Indeed, many works that are now considered 'classics' were widely criticized or even simply ignored in their time."

This combination creates a coherent and logical argument: it's futile to objectively define literary quality when a work is new because such qualities aren't quantifiable, and history shows that many future classics were initially poorly received or overlooked.