Michelangelo’s sixteenth-century Sistine Chapel paintings are currentl

Kritisood
Let's say you paint a portrait. I come in and add a mild shadow to the portrait. Your work is still perfectly visible, it just has an extra layer of shadow now.
Would you say that work is original?
Maybe you did not want a shadow! maybe that's your style.
However subtle my addition may be, it is still an addition.

Makes sense ?

So, here is my take:

The restorers are only removing newer paintings to uncover Michelangelo's. If there are no Michelangelo's paintings under the ones which they will remove, then there is no reason to remove it. Hence, A, as there is no point in removing these newer paintings anymore - there's no original work of Michelangelo underneath them.

Michelangelo’s sixteenth-century Sistine Chapel paintings are currently being restored. A goal of the restorers is to uncover Michelangelo’s original work, and so additions made to Michelangelo’s paintings by later artists are being removed. However, the restorers have decided to make one exception: to leave intact additions that were painted by da Volterra.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to reconcile the restorers’ decision with the goal stated in the passage?

(A) The restorers believe that da Volterra stripped away all previous layers of paint before he painted his own additions to the Sistine Chapel.
So, what if by removing da Volterra's work, some of Michelangelo's original work is removed. This may be a problem for the restorers.

(B) Because da Volterra used a type of pigment that is especially sensitive to light, the additions to the Sistine Chapel that ad Volterra painted have relatively muted colors.
Who cares? We have no information about light exposure in the Sistine Chapel.

(C) Da Volterra’s additions were painted in a style that was similar to the style used by Michelangelo.
This is a great trap answer. If Da Volterra's work is similar to Michelangelo's, why would we want to remove it? True, but what if other painters' works are similar to Da Volterra's and to Michelangelo's? Clearly, we're looking to keep Michelangelo's work intact... not keep works that look similar to his on his paintings.

(D) Michelangelo is famous primarily for his sculptures and only secondarily for his paintings, whereas da Volterra is known exclusively for his paintings.
Really? Who cares what he's famous for. We want to keep his paintings in tact... not have them covered with someone else's painting who might have been more renowned for painting that him.

(E) Da Volterra’s work is considered by certain art historians to be just as valuable as the work of additions to Michelangelo’s work.
Similar to D. we do not care about value, or fame, only to keep Michelangelo's original work in tact...

This one is clearly head spinning. I am not able to see why A is the correct choice.
My reasoning:

#1: Goal is to restore MA's original work
#2: All additions to MA's paintings by later artists are being removed.
#3: restorers decided to leave an exception: not remove Da Volterra's addition.

A says that DV stripped off all previous layers of paints before adding onto the MA's original work - S.Chapel [I get a hint here that the original painting is still intact beneath the layer of DV's addition; he just removed off new additions (of other artists) from the version he received] - still this would be considered an addition and doesn't connect to #1 (the goal of restoring MA's original work)

Experts seeking your feedback.
daagh VeritasKarishma mikemcgarry

we need an option that shows why da Volterra's are essential for the painting!


(A) The restorers believe that da Volterra stripped away all previous layers of paint before he painted his own additions to the Sistine Chapel.
If we removed da Volterra's addition that means that the painting will be missing pieces wherever his additions were made--this would absolutely destroy the painting!!
removing da Volterra's addition= blank spots on the painting= Correct!

(B) Because da Volterra used a type of pigment that is especially sensitive to light, the additions to the Sistine Chapel that ad Volterra painted have relatively muted colors.
Maybe Michelangelo's original work also consisted of colours that are light sensitive and to match up da Volterra used the same-- however doesnt prove why we cannot remove da Volterra's additions... we do not know whether removing light sensitive colours causes damage to the painting or not and if they do not then this option doesn't provide any evidence for the discrepancy!- wrong!


(C) Da Volterra’s additions were painted in a style that was similar to the style used by Michelangelo.-
the other painters additions might have been painted in a style similar to that of Michelangelo- this option is a 50/50 option-wrong!

(D) Michelangelo is famous primarily for his sculptures and only secondarily for his paintings, whereas da Volterra is known exclusively for his paintings.
Even if Da Volterra is primarily known for his paintings the others (whose additions are removed) might also be primarily known for their paintings-- how does this prove that Da Volterra is different from the others?-- why only Da volterras additions stay and not the others?- wrong!

(E) Da Volterra’s work is considered by certain art historians to be just as valuable as the work of additions to Michelangelo’s work.- if we are removing the others and others=Da Volterra then Da Volterra is nothing special.--- further increases the gap in the discrepancy!

"when the option says "ALL LAYERS OF PAINT" it literally means every single layer even whatever Michelangelo painted!!- so that means if we erase da Volterra's additions it means the canvas in those places will be blank!- white blank pieces thats why da Volterra's additions are very necessary!

i hope this helps

Hi sampriya :

Option A reads: (A) The restorers believe that da Volterra stripped away all previous layers of paint before he painted his own additions to the Sistine Chapel.

don't you think that removing off all layers actually means removing additional layers to the original painting? If all layers (including that of original painter) had been removed, then the option probably shouldn't have read "..his own additions to the Sistine Chapel" because there would have been no Sistine Chapel .. only a blank canvas which was Sistine Chapel before .. but now it is only the work of DV.

My confusion stemmed from this thought process. Looking for feedback. Thanks.

then the option should specifically mention this -all previous layers of paint- painted by the artists after Michelangelo

what if da Volterra was the first/second artist to paint over the sistine chapel?- we don't really know about the additions . If he was the first one to do the touch up and he removed all the layers that means he removed Michelangelo's part wherever he did the touch ups

since the argument didn't specifically mention that "the removal of paints = the removal of the "additional paints" by artists "

we can consider that da Volterra removed even Michelangelo's part.

since they are talking about restoring and not repainting they are concerned with restoring a few parts of the painting--i.e the later artists did touch ups to the paintings

therefore it wouldn't be da Volterra's work as he erased a few parts that needed restoration however the paining is mostly by Michelangelo.

Hi Experts,

For me, even A seems not 100% correct. How can we say that since the space will be blank so we can keep some other person's painting there when we are restoring a piece of artwork for the specific purpose of showcasing his/her work?

Option C seems better than A though it has flaws.