Patronus wrote:
Art historian: Successful forgeries tend to be those most recently painted. While such a phenomenon may sound counterintuitive, a forger is able to exploit current modes of aesthetics to create paintings that appeal to the eye of his or her contemporaries. This very quality, however, is what makes those paintings seem amateurish to subsequent generations. As a result, a majority of forgeries is identified as such roughly twenty-five years after their creation.
Which of the following is an assumption upon which the argument rests?
A) A generation consists of exactly twenty-five years.
B) Computer analysis, which does not rely on currentaesthetic trends, can often determine with a high degree of accuracy the legitimacy of a painting.
C) What is deemed aesthetically pleasing does not change in the course of twenty-five years.
D) A piece of art determined to be a forgery does not, after a period of twenty-five years, become valued for its own intrinsic merits.
E) Those who expose the majority of paintings as forgeries are guided by aesthetic considerations.
Please can someone explain the conclusion first of all, and then why is OA correct? Thankyou.
Conclusion- As a result , a majority of forgeries is identified as such roughly twenty-five years after their creation.
Basically the argument's conclusion states that the paintings seem amateurish to subsequent generations and hence ,majority of these paintings are easily identifiable as forgeries.
A) A generation consists of exactly twenty-five years.
The argument states that the paintings seem amateurish to subsequent generations and it does not matter whether a generation last 25 years or more.
B) Computer analysis, which does not rely on current aesthetic trends, can often determine with a high degree of accuracy the legitimacy of a painting.
Out of scope. There may be other ways to determine whether a painting is amateurish. Besides, the aesthetic 'part' is what is being discussed and any other quality being discussed is out of scope.
C) What is deemed aesthetically pleasing does not change in the course of twenty-five years.
Looks good! But is not correct. What is deemed aesthetic may change and hence the painting may seem even more amateurish. When we negate this option, it does not weaken the conclusion.
D)
A piece of art determined to be a forgery does not, after a period of twenty-five years, become valued for its own intrinsic merits.
As long as the painting is determined to be a forgery who cares.
E) Those who expose the majority of paintings as forgeries are guided by aesthetic considerations.
This is exactly what is unstated. The paintings seem amateurish to subsequent generations because they seem unaesthetic or amateurish to those who expose paintings as forgeries.
If this option is NOT TRUE then , then the conclusion is weakened.
You can also think this as CAUSE AND EFFECT.( Use of the words -As a Result - is made in the conclusion...)
Cause- Paintings seem amateurish
Effect- Makes forgeries identifiable.
E states the Cause and Effect.
If majority of paintings can not be identified using aesthetics then it means that there is some other quality or method used to identify the forgeries.
I donot mind KUDOS.. _________________
Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.
I hated every minute of training, but I said, 'Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion.-Mohammad Ali