Lakshmana Raja wrote:
GMATNinja can you explain the justification of answer C for this question
Sure! Let's take a good look at the prompt first.
Quote:
Curator: The decision to restore the cloak of the central figure in Veronese’s painting from its present red to the green found underneath is fully justified. Reliable x-ray and chemical tests show that the red pigment was applied after the painting had been completed, and that the red paint was not mixed in Veronese’s workshop. Hence it appears likely that an artist other than Veronese tampered with Veronese’s painting after its completion.
The
curator concludes that
the decision to restore the cloak to green is fully justified. Here's how this argument breaks down:
- The cloak was originally painted green.
- Tests show that the red paint on the cloak seen today was applied after the painting was completed.
- Tests also show that this red paint was not mixed in Veronese's workshop.
- Therefore, it appears likely that a different artist (not Veronese) tampered with this painting after it was completed.
- Therefore, the decision to remove that red paint is justified.
What jumps out at me right away in this argument? Well, the curator assumes that Veronese could not have applied red paint outside of the workshop. If we had any evidence showing that Veronese could have altered the painting outside the workshop, then we would no longer believe the curator's claim that a different artist tampered with this painting.
Quote:
Art critic: But in a copy of Veronese’s painting made shortly after Veronese died, the cloak is red. It is highly unlikely that a copyist would have made so major a change so soon after Veronese’s death.
Well, this isn't particularly helpful. The
critic doesn't challenge the argument by presenting new information about where or how Veronese applied the red paint. However, the critic does provide evidence about
when this change to red may have taken place:
- A copy of the original was made shortly after Veronese died.
- In this copy, the cloak was painted red.
- It is unlikely that a copyist would make a major change to the painting so soon after Veronese's death.
- Therefore, the original cloak must have already been painted red at the time Veronese died.
As with the curator's argument, there are gaps here. The critic assumes that if Veronese were alive, then Veronese would have some kind of control or approval over the color of the cloak. But since we don't have any evidence about where and how the color was changed, we can't confirm this assumption. It's possible that Veronese gave up control of the painting after it left the workshop, and some other artist changed the color to red without Veronese's approval.
Now we're dealing with two flawed arguments that depend on very different assumptions. Let's be sure that we're totally clear on what the GMAT wants us to analyze.
Quote:
The art critic’s response to the curator would provide the strongest support for which one of the following conclusions?
Great! This question wants us to identify what conclusion would be best supported
by the critic's response. This means we don't have to worry about whether the critic's counter-argument really weakens the curator's original argument. We just need to pick the choice
that best matches the critic's conclusion.The best answer choice will tell us that the cloak was red when Veronese died. Let's do this:
Quote:
(A) The copy of Veronese’s painting that was made soon after the painter’s death is indistinguishable from the original.
Choice (A) isn't a
conclusion to the critic's argument. (A) says that the copyist did not deviate from the original (at least, as it appeared soon after the death of Veronese).
However, we cannot
arrive at this conclusion based on the art critic's statements. In other words, the art critic's statements do not suggest that the copy is
indistinguishable from the original.
(A) could certainly strengthen the art critic's position, but we're not looking for a strengthener. So eliminate (A).
Quote:
(B) No painting should be restored before the painting is tested with technologically sophisticated equipment.
We don't care about the methodology for restoring a painting. It's nowhere in the critic's argument, and it certainly isn't the critic's conclusion. Eliminate (B).
Quote:
(C) The proposed restoration will fail to restore Veronese’s painting to the appearance it had at the end of the artist’s lifetime.
This matches what we've read in the critic's argument. It may feel like we're stating the obvious, but that's because we've done the work to break down what the critic is saying. The critic says that the painting was red when Veronese died. Consequently, if the restoration goes with green, it won't match the appearance of the cloak at the end of Veronese's life.
Choice (C) doesn't resolve any of the great mysteries about how the cloak was changed to red, but it doesn't have to. The best answer choice only has to fit the argument the critic has made, so let's keep (C) and finish our process of elimination.
Quote:
(D) The value of an artist’s work is not necessarily compromised when that work is tampered with by later artists.
The critic's argument never mentions the
value of an artist's work. Eliminate (D).
Quote:
(E) Veronese did not originally intend the central figure’s cloak to be green.
The critic's argument never mentions Veronese's
original intentions. The argument is focused on the color of the cloak when Veronese died. So let's eliminate (E) as well.
(C) remains the best answer choice.
Is this a strengthening question or method of reasoning? Choice (C) seems to give answer to the latter, but the stem says its a strengthening question.