Art historian: Great works of art have often elicited outrage when fir

Question

Art historian: Great works of art have often elicited outrage when first presented; in Europe, Stravinsky's  Rite of Spring  prompted a riot, and Manet's  Dejeuner sur l'herbe  elicited outrage and derision. So, since it is clear that art is often shocking, we should not hesitate to use public funds for supporting works of art that many people find shocking.

Which of the following is an assumption, that is required for the Art historian to draw his conclusion properly?

A. Most art is shocking

B. Stravinsky and Manet received public funding for their art

C. Art used to be more shocking than it currently is

D. Public fund should support art

E. Anything that shocks is an art

Source: Powerscore CR Bible

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Take a close look at the conclusion: “we should not hesitate to use public funds to support works of art that many people find shocking.” Did “public funds” appear anywhere else in the argument? No. Given our discussion about linking new elements that appear in the conclusion, you should have recognized that a new element was present and responded accordingly. Given that Supporters connect new elements, one would suspect that the correct answer would include this element and that either answer choice (B) or (D) was correct.

Take a look at the argument structure:

Premise: Great works of art have often elicited outrage when first presented; in Europe, Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring prompted a riot, and Manet’s Déjeuner sur l’herbe elicited outrage and derision.

Premise: Art is often shocking.

Conclusion: We should not hesitate to use public funds to support works of art that many people find shocking. However, because the structure of the last sentence in the stimulus (“So, since...”) suggests that the author uses the second premise to prove the conclusion, you should focus on the relationship between those two pieces. For the author to say that art is shocking and therefore art should be publicly funded, the author must assume that art is worthy of public support. This assumption is reflected in answer  choice (D), the correct answer.

Answer choice (A): The author states that “art is often shocking” but does not assume that most art is shocking.

Answer choice (B): This is the most popular wrong answer choice. In the argument, is the author committed to believing that Stravinsky and Manet received public funding? Does the author need this statement in order for the rest of the argument to work? No. The author uses Stravinsky and Manet as examples of artists whose work caused shock, but the author never assumes that those individuals received public funding. Think for a moment—does the conclusion rest on the fact that Stravinsky and Manet received public funding?

Answer choice (C): The author makes no statement regarding the “shock level” of today’s art, and thus there is no way to determine if an assumption has been made comparing the shock level of past and present art.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer. The answer acts as a Supporter and connects the elements in the final sentence.

Answer choice (E): The author states that “art is often shocking,” but there is no indication that a conditional assumption has been made stating that anything that shocks is art.

11MBA · Answer

D?

Without the assumption that public funds should be used to support art then the whole argument falls apart.

anish319 · Answer

I like A. This keeps it in line and adds to the conclusion. We need to find something that makes it clear that art is often shocking....and the fact that the assumption of Most art is shocking (answer choice A), is the best answer.

belladipo · Answer

I chose D.

A is wrong simply because is not an assumption as in the argument it is said that "So , since it is clear that art is often shocking ".

gmataspirant2009 · Answer

You are wrong. Conclusion of the stimulus is not "Art is shocking" but it is "Public fund should support art" So the assumption should support the later one. "Most art is socking" can be a premise and not the assumtion since by the definition of assumtion "Assumtions are unstated premise which if can be proven wrong, undermines the conclusion."
I think the answer should be D.

hitman4683v1 · Answer

OA is D
The source as said earlier is Powerscore CR bible. This is a question from the assumption chapter
The argument structure is:
Premise: Great works of art have often elicited....outrage and derision
Premise: Art is often shocking
Conclusion: We shouldnt hesitate to use public funds for art
Here the public funds is clear disconnect from the earlier premises. So we need to provide an assumption that makes public funds coherent with the rest of the stimuli
A -> author says Art is shocking...what kind or what amount is never specified
B -> <Initially I selected this> This is most popular wrong answer<as the book says> Even if true, this doesnt prove the conclusion
C -> Doesnt even come close
D -> This is the only option that does the required connection
E -> Yeah right....tell me about it....

HG0815 · Answer

IMO OA is D

1. Most art is shocking
 -> The passage said 'So,since it is clear that art is often shocking'
 : 'Often' do not have similar meaning of 'Most'
2. Stravinsky and Manet received public funding for their art
 -> nothing
3. Art used to be more shocking than it currently is
 -> Inversed argumen.
 The passage said 'Great works of art have often elicited outrage when first presented'
 It means that in the past, art was shocking. But now art is not shocking. 
4. Public fund should support art
 -> Keep.
5. Anything that shocks is an art
 -> Same as A.
 :'Anything' do not have similar meaning of 'Most'.

Only left thing is D, so I chose D.

Sateni7628 · Answer

Conclusion: Even if art is shocking, public funds can be used for supporting works of art without any hesitation. If public fund should not support art, then the funds cannot be used for supporting works of art whether they are shocking or not. Hence conclusion must depend on the assumption that public fund should support art. KUDOs if you like my explanation.

US09 · Answer

D.

Since only D as a option breaks down conclusion when negated. All other options do not hit the conclusion and are not a pre-requisite for the conclusion to hold true. Conclusion is- we should not hesitate to use public funds for supporting works of art that many people find shocking.

A. Exaggerated.
B. Not related with the conclusion.
C. Not related.
D. Keep & negate.
E. Exaggerated and not related for the conclusion to hold true.

ucb2k7 · Answer

Could you please explain as to why D is the correct answer. It brings in a compulsion factor in the assumption question contrary to what we generally tend to avoid for an assumption question.
Can you please tell the best way to tackle this question.

Thanks,

ucb2k7

gmatexam439 · Answer

I got this question wrong myself. I had chosen "B". I was confused between B and D. But if we apply negation technique D will stand as the clear winner.

B's Negation - Stravinsky and Manet DID NOT receive public funding for their art --Even if they didn't receive funding, public funds can still be used to support art. Conclusion stands

D's Negation - Public fund should NOT support art --If this is true then the conclusion falls apart.

Regards

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

ucb2k7 The "compulsion" you mention is also in the conclusion, which says that we "should not hesitate" to fund shocking art. If the conclusion were about simple fact: what is/isn't funded, what is/isn't considered art by most people, then we wouldn't want "should." But the argument is making a recommendation, so we need guidance for that recommendation. In simple terms, we need a "should" to prove another "should."

If we negate D--public funds should NOT support art--then we certainly couldn't draw the conclusion, which says that we shouldn't hesitate to fund even art that shocks people.

If we negate D--public funds should NOT support art--then we certainly couldn't draw the conclusion, which says that we shouldn't hesitate to fund even art that shocks people.

abhinav770 · Answer

Allow me to explain.
Premise: Public funds are pooled. Great works of art have often elicited outrage when first presented.
Conclusion: Public funds should be used to support art anyways.
Assumption:Should bridge the gap, sufficiently from the context of the information provided.
 Art historian: Great works of art have often elicited outrage when first presented; in Europe, Stravinsky's Rite of Spring prompted a riot, and Manet's Dejeuner sur l'herbe elicited outrage and derision. So, since it is clear that art is often shocking, we should not hesitate to use public funds for supporting works of art that many people find shocking.

Which of the following is an assumption, that is required for the Art historian to draw his conclusion properly?

1.  Most art is shocking

2.  Stravinsky and Manet received public funding for their art

3.  Art used to be more shocking than it currently is

4.  Public fund should support art 
 Bridges the gap between the conclusion and premise.

5.  Anything that shocks is an art

Prasannathawait · Answer

Yes D is the correct answer because if we negate D then the conclusion will fall.

I was wrong and chose A.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Art historian: Great works of art have often elicited outrage when fir

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Art historian: Great works of art have often elicited outrage when fir

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards