The impressionist painters expressly disavowed any interest in philosophy, yet their new approach to art had far-reaching philosophical implications. For the view of matter that the Impressionists assumed differed profoundly from the view that had previously prevailed among artists. This view helped to unify the artistic works created in the new style. The ancient Greeks had conceived of the world in concrete terms, even endowing abstract qualities with bodies. This Greek view of matter persisted, so far as painting was concerned, into the nineteenth century. The Impressionists, on the other hand, viewed light, not matter, as the ultimate visual reality. The philosopher Taine expressed the Impressionist view of things when he said, “The chief ‘person’ in a picture is the light in which everything is bathed.” In Impressionist painting, solid bodies became mere reflectors of light, and distinctions between one object and another became arbitrary conventions; for by light all things were welded together. The treatment of both color and outline was transformed as well. Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light on the object’s colorless surface. And outline, whose function had formerly been to indicate the limits of objects, now marked instead merely the boundary between units of pattern, which often merged into one another. The Impressionist world was composed not of separate objects but of many surfaces on which light struck and was reflected with varying intensity to the eye through the atmosphere, which modified it. It was this process that produced the mosaic of colors that formed an Impressionist canvas. “Light becomes the sole subject of the picture,” writes Mauclair. “The interest of the object upon which it plays is secondary. Painting thus conceived becomes a purely optic art.” From this profoundly revolutionary form of art, then, all ideas—religious, moral, psychological—were excluded, and so were all emotions except certain aesthetic ones. The people, places, and things depicted in an Impressionist picture do not tell story or convey any special meaning; they are, instead, merely parts of pattern of light drawn from nature and captured on canvas by the artist. 1 1. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with (A) explaining how the Impressionists were influenced by scientific studies of light and color (B) discussing the philosophical implications of the Impressionist style of painting (C) identifying the revolutionary artistic techniques developed by the Impressionist painters (D) analyzing the influence of thinkers like Taine and Mauclair on Impressionist painting (E) defending the importance of the Impressionist painters in the history of modern art 2 2. According to the passage, the Impressionists differed from the ancient Greeks in that the Impressionists (A) considered color to be property inherent in objects (B) placed a higher value on the narrative element in painting (C) depicted the objects in a painting as isolated, rather than united in a single pattern (D) treated light, rather than matter, as the ultimate reality (E) regarded art primarily as a medium for expressing moral and aesthetic ideas 3 3. The author’s quotation of a statement by Taine (lines 15-16) serves which of the following functions in the passage? (A) It furnishes a specific example of an Impressionist painting that features light as its chief subject. (B) It resolves an apparent contradiction in the philosophy of the Impressionists. (C) It qualifies the statement that the ancient Greeks viewed the world in concrete terms. (D) It summarizes the unique perspective that the Impressionists brought to painting. (E) It provides a concrete illustration of the far-reaching philosophical implications of Impressionism. 4 4. According to the passage, the Impressionists believed that the atmosphere (A) reflects light with varying intensity (B) creates the illusion of color in colorless surfaces (C) modifies the shapes of objects (D) is the result of vibrations of light (E) affects the way we perceived color 5 5. The author’s use of the term “mosaic of colors” (line 32) suggests that Impressionist paintings were characterized by (A) discontinuous dabs of unmixed pigment (B) broad, sweeping brush strokes (C) clearly defined forms and objects (D) subjects devoid of emotive or literary qualities (E) the glowing reds, greens, and midnight blues of stained glass 6 6. The passage contains information that answers which of the following questions? I. How did the Impressionists perceive matter? II. What is the unifying element in a typical Impressionist painting? II. How did the Impressionists’ view of color differ from that of eighteenth-century artists? (A) I only (B) III only (C) I and II only (D) II and III only (E) I, II, and III 7 7. The ideas attributed to the Impressionists in the passage suggest that an Impressionist painter would be most likely to agree with which of the following statement? (A) A picture is significant primarily as a manifestation of the artist’s mental state. (B) The highest purpose of art is to teach religious truths. (C) The quality of a picture has nothing to do with the nature of the objects it depicts. (D) An artist should strive to recreate on canvas the inner nature of objects from real life. (E) It is futile to attempt to paint pictures that aim to copy the optical appearance of the world.

The passage states: "Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light on the object’s colorless surface." "Formerly" refers to the prevailing view before Impressionism, which includes the 18th-century artistic tradition. Impressionists’ view is that color is not inherent in objects but results from light vibrations. This sentence directly compares the two views, answering how the Impressionists’ view of color differed from that of earlier artists. The passage states the Greek view of matter (and thus color as an inherent property) persisted into the nineteenth century . The Impressionists, emerging in the late 19th century, directly reacted against this prevailing view. Therefore, the description of what color was "formerly considered" refers to the view held in the period immediately preceding Impressionism. Since the 18th century falls within that unbroken tradition, the contrast provided explicitly answers how the Impressionist view differed from that of 18th-century artists.

Last visit was: 27 Apr 2026, 20:31

It is currently 27 Apr 2026, 20:31

Toolkit

Reading Comprehension (RC)

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.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Apr 28
Join - GMAT Day!
08:00 AM PDT
-
11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Apr 27
Try OnDemand GMAT Masterclass
11:00 AM EDT
-
12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors

Back to Forum

Create Topic

The impressionist painters expressly disavowed any interest in

1 2

BaoTrang29

Joined: 16 Jan 2025

Last visit: 20 Mar 2025

Posts: 1

Given Kudos: 1

Posts: 1

Kudos: 0

06 Feb 2025, 10:05

Kudos

Bookmarks

But I'm still confused when the time the author mentioned in the passage is "into nineteenth century", so how can we make sure that the airtist in nineteenth century and the eighteen century had similar view?
Could you help me out? tks.

KarishmaB

visheshsahni

Sorry but I disagree how statement 1 can be answered in Q6. I think OA being B is wrong. Should be D, not even E as stated above.

workout Please bump this for expert review. Too many doubts here and not a single confident answer.

GMATNinja KarishmaB - any insights please ?

For question 6, answer (E) is correct.

I. How did the Impressionists perceive matter?

"The ancient Greeks had conceived of the world in concrete terms, even endowing abstract qualities with bodies. This Greek view of matter persisted, so far as painting was concerned, into the nineteenth century. The Impressionists, on the other hand, viewed light, not matter, as the ultimate visual reality."

Gives the Greek view of matter (bodies/objects). Impressionists' viewed matter as "not the ultimate visual reality".

"In Impressionist painting, solid bodies became mere reflectors of light, and distinctions between one object and another became arbitrary conventions"

Gives how Impressionists viewed matter.

"The Impressionist world was composed not of separate objects but of many surfaces on which light struck..."

Again, gives how Impressionists viewed matter.

II. What is the unifying element in a typical Impressionist painting?

"...for by light all things were welded together"

No doubt about this that light was the unifying element.

II. How did the Impressionists’ view of color differ from that of eighteenth-century artists?

"...Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light on the object’s colorless surface."

Again, no doubt.

DmitryFarberMPrep

Manhattan Prep Instructor

Joined: 22 Mar 2011

Last visit: 03 Mar 2026

Posts: 3,005

Own Kudos:

8,627

Given Kudos: 57

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85 Verified score

Posts: 3,005

Kudos: 8,627

08 Feb 2025, 02:53

Kudos

Bookmarks

I can see why so many people are bothered by #6, item III. Clearly, nothing is directly mentioned about 18th century artists. However, the text does tell us that the Impressionists viewed color in a new way that represented a break with how it had previously seen. So as long as we know that this happened after the 18th century, then we know that 18th century painters did not see color in this new way. That's a kind of inference the GMAT does sometimes expect us to make. It's like if they say "China is the only country that allows xyz," and then they ask how China differs from Brazil. Even if the passage never mentions Brazil, you can infer that Brazil does not allow xyz.

Having said that, it feels kind of unfair that the passage doesn't even say when the Impressionist movement was. So unless we happen to know this, the only time marker is the vague reference we have to an attitude persisting into the 19th century. For the question to be truly fair, the text should make it perfectly clear that the change in question happened in the 19th century.

BaoTrang29

KarishmaB

visheshsahni

rak08

Joined: 01 Feb 2025

Last visit: 26 Apr 2026

Posts: 268

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 405

Location: India

Schools: NUS '26 ISB '26 INSEAD Aug '26

GPA: 7.14

Schools: NUS '26 ISB '26 INSEAD Aug '26

Posts: 268

Kudos: 28

02 Nov 2025, 08:31

Kudos

Bookmarks

KarishmaB,

how can we say "with 18th century artist"??

KarishmaB

KarishmaB

Tutor

Joined: 16 Oct 2010

Last visit: 27 Apr 2026

Posts: 16,446

Own Kudos:

79,430

[1]

Given Kudos: 485

Location: Pune, India

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 16,446

Kudos: 79,430

[1]

02 Nov 2025, 08:49

Kudos

Bookmarks

This Greek view of matter persisted, so far as painting was concerned, into the nineteenth century. The Impressionists, on the other hand, viewed light, not matter, as the ultimate visual reality.

So the Impressionist view came up earliest sometime in the 19th century.

In Impressionist painting, solid bodies became mere reflectors of light,... The treatment of both color and outline was transformed as well. Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light on the object’s colorless surface.

Before the Impressionist view (i.e. in 18th century and previously), color was considered a property inherent in an object but that changed with the Impressionist view.

Hence comparison with 18th century artists is justified.

rak08

KarishmaB,

how can we say "with 18th century artist"??

Shabaz18gmat

Joined: 16 Sep 2024

Last visit: 01 Mar 2026

Posts: 12

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 4

Location: India

Schools: HEC MiM "27 (S)

GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q85 V81 DI79 Verified score

GPA: 3.2

Products:

Schools: HEC MiM "27 (S)

GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q85 V81 DI79 Verified score

Posts: 12

Kudos: 1

09 Jan 2026, 10:23

Kudos

Bookmarks

Thanks for the explanation. My questions is there is no mention of how 18th century artists view color for III. In your explanation, you talked about light and matter but nothing is there about the color. Can you please clarify it?

nghatri

QUESTION 3:

"For the view of matter that the Impressionists assumed differed profoundly from the view that had previously prevailed among artists. This view helped to unify the artistic works created in the new style.

The ancient Greeks had conceived of the world in concrete terms, even endowing abstract qualities with bodies. This Greek view of matter persisted, so far as painting was concerned, into the nineteenth century. The Impressionists, on the other hand, viewed light, not matter, as the ultimate visual reality.”

This entire part of the passage give you the answer to whether each of the three statements for Q6 is true:

I. How did the Impressionists perceive matter? only mentions that they perceived matter differently than previous artists.

II. What is the unifying element in a typical Impressionist painting? only mentions that this different view helped unify the artistic works created in the new style; does not say WHAT the unifying element was.

II. How did the Impressionists’ view of color differ from that of eighteenth-century artists? directly mentions it in this part, "The Impressionists, on the other hand, viewed light, not matter, as the ultimate visual reality.”

Shabaz18gmat

Joined: 16 Sep 2024

Last visit: 01 Mar 2026

Posts: 12

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 4

Location: India

Schools: HEC MiM "27 (S)

GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q85 V81 DI79 Verified score

GPA: 3.2

Products:

Schools: HEC MiM "27 (S)

GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q85 V81 DI79 Verified score

Posts: 12

Kudos: 1

09 Jan 2026, 10:34

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hey,
Thanks for the explanation. I'm still having doubt about the III. Nowhere in the passage, anything is mentioned about how 18th century artist's view of color.

Regarding the contrast in the view of color is this sentence:
" Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light on the object’s colorless surface.".

Does Formerly implies 18th century? I don't think so.

Only part in the passage where a timeline is mentioned is this:
" This Greek view of matter persisted, so far as painting was concerned, into the nineteenth century."

Only 19th century is mentioned. EVEN IF WE consider this statement and author's view that formerly color was considered a property inherent in an object, how can we so sure that the "formerly" means 18th Century? It can be 17th Century as well no?

I'd love to know how you interpreted this mam because I always found your explanations right on the spot but this time, it's quite vague

KarishmaB

guddo

Joined: 25 May 2021

Last visit: 27 Apr 2026

Posts: 1,036

Own Kudos:

11,400

[1]

Given Kudos: 32

Posts: 1,036

Kudos: 11,400

[1]

09 Jan 2026, 10:34

Kudos

Bookmarks

Quote:

The impressionist painters expressly disavowed any interest in philosophy, yet their new approach to art had far-reaching philosophical implications. For the view of matter that the Impressionists assumed differed profoundly from the view that had previously prevailed among artists. This view helped to unify the artistic works created in the new style.
The ancient Greeks had conceived of the world in concrete terms, even endowing abstract qualities with bodies. This Greek view of matter persisted, so far as painting was concerned, into the nineteenth century. The Impressionists, on the other hand, viewed light, not matter, as the ultimate visual reality. The philosopher Taine expressed the Impressionist view of things when he said, “The chief ‘person’ in a picture is the light in which everything is bathed.”

In Impressionist painting, solid bodies became mere reflectors of light, and distinctions between one object and another became arbitrary conventions; for by light all things were welded together. The treatment of both color and outline was transformed as well. Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light on the object’s colorless surface. And outline, whose function had formerly been to indicate the limits of objects, now marked instead merely the boundary between units of pattern, which often merged into one another.

The Impressionist world was composed not of separate objects but of many surfaces on which light struck and was reflected with varying intensity to the eye through the atmosphere, which modified it. It was this process that produced the mosaic of colors that formed an Impressionist canvas. “Light becomes the sole subject of the picture,” writes Mauclair. “The interest of the object upon which it plays is secondary. Painting thus conceived becomes a purely optic art.”

From this profoundly revolutionary form of art, then, all ideas—religious, moral, psychological—were excluded, and so were all emotions except certain aesthetic ones. The people, places, and things depicted in an Impressionist picture do not tell story or convey any special meaning; they are, instead, merely parts of pattern of light drawn from nature and captured on canvas by the artist.

3. The author’s quotation of a statement by Taine (lines 15-16) serves which of the following functions in the passage?

(A) It furnishes a specific example of an Impressionist painting that features light as its chief subject.
(B) It resolves an apparent contradiction in the philosophy of the Impressionists.
(C) It qualifies the statement that the ancient Greeks viewed the world in concrete terms.
(D) It summarizes the unique perspective that the Impressionists brought to painting.
(E) It provides a concrete illustration of the far-reaching philosophical implications of Impressionism.

The author quotes Taine to concisely express the core Impressionist belief that light is the primary subject of a painting, which distinguishes their approach from the traditional focus on solid matter. This quotation serves to encapsulate the fundamental shift in perspective that defined the movement.

Answer: D

guddo

Joined: 25 May 2021

Last visit: 27 Apr 2026

Posts: 1,036

Own Kudos:

11,400

[1]

Given Kudos: 32

Posts: 1,036

Kudos: 11,400

[1]

09 Jan 2026, 10:41

Kudos

Bookmarks

Quote:

6. The passage contains information that answers which of the following questions?

I. How did the Impressionists perceive matter?
II. What is the unifying element in a typical Impressionist painting?
II. How did the Impressionists’ view of color differ from that of eighteenth-century artists?

(A) I only
(B) III only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and III

The passage explains that Impressionist painters shifted the focus of art from solid matter to light, viewing light as the ultimate visual reality. This perspective unified their paintings, treating objects as reflectors of light, color as vibrations of light, and outlines as boundaries between patterns of light. All narrative or symbolic meaning was excluded, leaving light itself as the primary subject.

I. How did the Impressionists perceive matter?
The passage states: "The Impressionists, on the other hand, viewed light, not matter, as the ultimate visual reality" and "solid bodies became mere reflectors of light." This directly answers how they perceived matter.

II. What is the unifying element in a typical Impressionist painting?
The passage explains: "by light all things were welded together" and "Light becomes the sole subject of the picture." This identifies light as the unifying element.

III. How did the Impressionists’ view of color differ from that of eighteenth-century artists?
The passage states: "Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light." This explicitly contrasts the Impressionist view with the earlier view.

All three questions are answered in the passage.

Answer: (E)

guddo

Joined: 25 May 2021

Last visit: 27 Apr 2026

Posts: 1,036

Own Kudos:

11,400

[1]

Given Kudos: 32

Posts: 1,036

Kudos: 11,400

[1]

09 Jan 2026, 10:57

Kudos

Bookmarks

Shabaz18gmat

The passage states:

"Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light on the object’s colorless surface."

"Formerly" refers to the prevailing view before Impressionism, which includes the 18th-century artistic tradition.
Impressionists’ view is that color is not inherent in objects but results from light vibrations.

This sentence directly compares the two views, answering how the Impressionists’ view of color differed from that of earlier artists.

Quote:

Shabaz18gmatHey,
Thanks for the explanation. I'm still having doubt about the III. Nowhere in the passage, anything is mentioned about how 18th century artist's view of color.

Regarding the contrast in the view of color is this sentence:
" [color=#0f0f0f]Color, formerly considered a property inherent in an object, was seen to be merely the result of vibrations of light on the object’s colorless surface.".

Does Formerly implies 18th century? I don't think so.

Only part in the passage where a timeline is mentioned is this:
" This Greek view of matter persisted, so far as painting was concerned, into the nineteenth century."

Only 19th century is mentioned. EVEN IF WE consider this statement and author's view that formerly color was considered a property inherent in an object, how can we so sure that the "formerly" means 18th Century? It can be 17th Century as well no?

I'd love to know how you interpreted this mam because I always found your explanations right on the spot but this time, it's quite vague [/color]

The passage states the Greek view of matter (and thus color as an inherent property) persisted into the nineteenth century. The Impressionists, emerging in the late 19th century, directly reacted against this prevailing view.

Therefore, the description of what color was "formerly considered" refers to the view held in the period immediately preceding Impressionism. Since the 18th century falls within that unbroken tradition, the contrast provided explicitly answers how the Impressionist view differed from that of 18th-century artists.

1 2

Moderators:

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

7391 posts

AbhishekP220108

507 posts

bhanu29

363 posts