On the surface, Melville' s Billy Budd is a simple story with a simple theme. However, if one views the novel as a religious allegory, then it assumes a richness and profundity that place it among the great novels of the nineteenth century. However, the central question remains: Did Melville intend an allegorical reading? Since there is no textual or historical evidence that he did, we should be content with reading Billy Budd as a simple tragedy. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the principle underlying the argument? ["Without relevant evidence as to a novel's intended reading, one should avoid viewing the work allegorically.", 'Given a choice between an allegorical and a nonallegorical reading of a novel, one should choose the latter.', "The only relevant evidence in deciding in which genre to place a novel is the author's stated intention.", 'In deciding between rival readings of a novel, one should choose the one that is most favorable to the work.']