Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 15 Sep 2014, 19:06

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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

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

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 328
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two [#permalink] New post 24 Jul 2008, 19:06
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
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.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Posts: 519
Schools: Wharton
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR: Paintings [#permalink] New post 24 Jul 2008, 20:02
x97agarwal wrote:
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.


I would go A.

A: Art dealers falsify attributions -- i.e., traditional attributions may have been falsified in order to increase financial gains by greedy parties
B: This would weaken the argument
C: Doesn't say anything about traditional attribution
D: Describes a consequence of attirbution, but this consequence does not tell us whether traditional attribution is a good or a bad thing.
E: Weakens argument
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Aug 2008
Posts: 3
Followers: 0

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

Re: CR: Paintings [#permalink] New post 09 Aug 2008, 03:43
IMO D

Please post the answer
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1406
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 117 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR: Paintings [#permalink] New post 09 Aug 2008, 18:08
x97agarwal wrote:
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. -> this sounds favourable since this says art dealers are driven by economic interests and hence dont attribute the paintings to right artists and hence the attribution is false and hence no special weight

(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. -> OOS we are talking about 200 years old paintings

(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. -> this is irrelevant we are not bothered about how difficult attribution is

(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. -> this apears close but says attributing to inferior artists makes the attributes bothers image of art masters but the attributes are decided by dealers hence depends upon them how good they are in judging the paintings.this is post impact.A wins.Its not always masters are good

(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. -> OOS

_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Re: CR: Paintings   [#permalink] 09 Aug 2008, 18:08
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
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 vksunder 2 24 Jul 2008, 14:55
It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two vineetgupta 13 11 Mar 2007, 03:53
It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two WinWinMBA 5 26 May 2005, 11:22
It is very difficult to prove today that a painting done two doggita 5 07 Dec 2004, 20:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by

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

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| 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®.