It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

It is currently 10 Dec 2016, 05:25
GMAT Club Tests

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 874
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 0

It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2007, 03:53
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two or three hundred years ago, especially one without a signature or with a questionably authentic signature, is indubitably the work of this or that particular artist. This fact gives the traditional attribution of a disputed painting special weight, since that attribution carries the presumption of historical continuity. Consequently, an art historian arguing for a deattribution will generally convince other art historians only if he or she can persuasively argue for a specific reattribution.

Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the position that the traditional attribution of a disputed painting should not have special weight?
(A) Art dealers have always been led by economic self-interest to attribute any unsigned paintings of merit to recognized masters rather than to obscure artists.
(B) When a painting is originally created, there are invariably at least some eyewitnesses who see the artist at work, and thus questions of correct attribution cannot arise at that time.
(C) There are not always clearly discernible differences between the occasional inferior work produced by a master and the very best work produced by a lesser talent.
(D) Attribution can shape perception inasmuch as certain features that would count as marks of greatness in a master’s work would be counted as signs of inferior artistry if a work were attributed to a minor artist.
(E) Even though some masters had specialists assist them with certain detail work, such as depicting lace, the resulting works are properly attributed to the masters alone.

Please give reasons for ur choices...
Request Expert Reply
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Director
Director
User avatar
Affiliations: FRM Charter holder
Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 734
Schools: Stanford, Chicago Booth, Babson College
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 76 [0], given: 4

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2007, 06:05
Is the answer A?
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 518
Location: Indonesia
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 207 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2007, 06:49
For me answer is C

Explanation:

A) Art dealers have always been led by economic self-interest to attribute any unsigned paintings of merit to recognized masters rather than to obscure artists. ( since art dealer is led by economic self-interest hence he will always recognized the painting as a masters piece, which means giving special weight to the painting, even though its made by some inferior artist so avoid A)(B) When a painting is originally created, there are invariably at least some eyewitnesses who see the artist at work, and thus questions of correct attribution cannot arise at that time. (we are talking about 200-300 years so getting eyewitness is not possible, avoid B)
(C) There are not always clearly discernible differences between the occasional inferior work produced by a master and the very best work produced by a lesser talent. ( It says that there is a visible diff btw the inferior work of master and superior work of lesser talent, which can be identified by art historian, as it can be re attributed)
(D) Attribution can shape perception inasmuch as certain features that would count as marks of greatness in a master’s work would be counted as signs of inferior artistry if a work were attributed to a minor artist. ( avoid D as it say, it difficult to discriminate the work of two extreme talents)(E) Even though some masters had specialists assist them with certain detail work, such as depicting lace, the resulting works are properly attributed to the masters alone. (It leads to giving special weight so avoid)

regards,

Amardeep
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 254
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2007, 07:58
It's C

We need to find the answer which tells us that the real/fake signature of the painting is not important to the attribution. C fits the answer.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

[#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2007, 08:21
Clear (A)
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 518
Location: Indonesia
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 207 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2007, 09:54
Hi Gmathopeful

Why A?

regards.

Amardeep
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 874
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2007, 10:24
The answer is A indeed...but can anyone tell me why??
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 298
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2007, 10:25
i do not know with this one. But A is out since it is outside of the scope of the argument.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 647
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 271 [0], given: 0

Re: A [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Sep 2007, 12:08
GMAThopeful wrote:
Clear (A)


Can you please explain why it is A? OA is A indeed.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2583
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 409 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Sep 2007, 10:46
Why not D?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Posts: 295
Location: Russia, Moscow
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Sep 2007, 10:57
LSAT one???
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 647
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 271 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Sep 2007, 11:46
yes...I think it is an LSAT problem..
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 215
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Sep 2007, 13:26
Why A?

Art dealers-are we supposed to consider them here?

LSAT has funny reasoning? Agree.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 157
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Sep 2007, 05:50
Somebody justifies an answer by saying:

"We need to find the answer which tells us that the real/fake signature of the painting is not important to the attribution."

But that isn't the question. The question is:

"Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the position that the traditional attribution of a disputed painting should not have special weight?" (which isn't really the subject of the preceding piece, but it is still the question).

So we need to find a weakness in a traditional attribution. Self-interest of dealers is a potential weakness in a traditional attribution. Quality of work (what is referred to in C) is irrelevant to the attribution - in fact C suggests that the existing attribution influences how the quality of the work is perceived. Answer is clearly A.
  [#permalink] 14 Sep 2007, 05:50
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Our work proves to be very successful. In the past three crejoc 3 18 Aug 2009, 08:22
2 It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two vaivish1723 9 01 Jul 2009, 01:19
It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two x97agarwal 3 24 Jul 2008, 19:06
It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two vksunder 2 24 Jul 2008, 14:55
1 It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two mymba99 7 16 Apr 2008, 10:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by

It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.