Recent scholarship has explored collaborative authorship in the English Renaissance. Critics have studied well-known collaborative teams, such as that of Beaumont and Fletcher, and have now increasingly acknowledged that even some of Shakespeare's plays were likely written with collaborators. Indeed, every major English Renaissance playwright probably worked collaboratively at times. Some critics, such as
Jeffrey Masten, hoped that this realization might dislodge traditional notions of authorship as a solitary activity. However, scholars analyzing plays written collaboratively often attempt to attribute acts, scenes, or speeches to individual authors who are thought to have worked separately before joining their work together. Thus, scholars' acceptance of the fact of collaborative writing has done little to change the model of the author; it simply multiplies the number of authors.

According to the passage, the "model of the author"
(A) is compatible with some scholars' views on authorial collaboration by English
Renaissance playwrights
(B) is not easy to reconcile with what scholars now understand about the working
methods used by playwrights like Beaumont and Fletcher
(C) has been primarily useful for scholars attempting to understand authorship during the
English Renaissance rather than for those thinking about authorship in other eras
(D) reflects an assumption that most authors during the English Renaissance collaborated
with others at least some of the time
(E) was intended to help distinguish the working methods of playwrights like Beaumont
and Fletcher from those of playwrights like Shakespeare

여기서 Model of author는 collaborative 작업을 했을 것이다 라는 것과 반대되는 견해 아닌가요? 그래서 저는 학자들이 현재 B와F가 작업한 방식에 대한 이해와 합치되기 어려울 것이다 라는 B를 골랐는데, A의 some scholars view는 무엇인가요?