The meanings of ‘it did not’

The meanings of ‘it did not’

The passage below is from The Library A Fragile History by Andrew Pettegree.

The passage below is from The Library A Fragile History by Andrew Pettegree.

With each century, new readers were brought into the compass of book ownership, and the same battles were repeatedly replayed, marking out the library as a political space. Should readers in the new nineteenth-century public libraries have the books that they desired, or books that would make them better, more cultured people? This raging debate was still echoing deep into the twentieth century: in the lists of ‘recommended’ texts issued for public libraries in America; in the prejudice against fiction in general, tolerated only in the hope that it would lead readers to more demanding literature (it did not); and in the anathematising of certain genres, such as romance.

I have a question on the underlined part.

First, let me explain my understanding of the structure of the sentence in question.

The sentence starts with ‘This raging debate was still echoing’. And when I read this part I have a question ‘where was this debate echoing’ and I think three WHEREs are as follows, ‘in the lists of -’, ‘in the prejudice against -’, ‘in the anathematising of -’.

Am I right?

Now the part in question, ‘it did not’. Structurally ‘it did not’ seems to be ‘it did not lead readers to more demanding literature’.

Am I right?

Then that part can be rephrased as follows: ‘This raging debate was still echoing in the prejudice against fiction in general, but the prejudice against fiction could be tolerated when they hope that fiction would lead readers to more demanding literature (but it did not lead any readers to more demanding literature.)

Am I right?

Thanks in advance.