Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Aug 2710:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Sep 0410:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
What does test anxiety really look like on the GMAT? For many test takers, it does not look like a panic attack. Instead, it shows up as brain fog, rereading, negative comparisons, mental noise....
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sept. 6, 9:30am-12:30pm EST- Sep 09
07:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway 
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2108:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Oct. 13, 2026 - Jan. 7, 2027, 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
14 Oct 2025, 18:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
When Lord Elgin removed portions of the Parthenon’s sculptural frieze in the early nineteenth century, his actions reflected the prevailing assumption that great art belonged wherever it could be most carefully preserved and most widely admired. Two centuries later, those same marbles, housed in London’s British Museum, stand at the center of a moral dispute less about art itself than about the changing meaning of cultural stewardship. The question of whether such artifacts should remain in Western institutions or be returned to their places of origin now engages not merely legal ownership but evolving conceptions of historical justice and global heritage.
Defenders of retention, often invoking the ideal of the “universal museum,” argue that art transcends geography. By situating objects from diverse civilizations side by side, museums encourage comparative understanding and present culture as a shared human achievement. They also claim a pragmatic virtue: artifacts are safeguarded under stable conditions and made accessible to an international public that might never travel to their countries of origin. In this view, returning objects risks fragmenting the global narrative of art and exposing works to political volatility or inadequate conservation.
Advocates of repatriation counter that such universalism, however noble in language, rests on a history of unequal power. Many collections were assembled through conquest, coercion, or opportunism disguised as preservation. To retain such works is, they contend, to perpetuate the asymmetries of empire and to deny communities the material anchors of their own memory. A sculpture removed from its temple or a mask stripped from its ritual context may lose precisely the cultural resonance that justifies its value in the first place.
What is emerging, then, is not a simple call for restitution but a redefinition of stewardship itself, from ownership and display toward acknowledgment and collaboration. The modern museum is being asked to function less as the custodian of other peoples’ pasts than as a partner in restoring them. Whether this transformation will reconcile the competing claims of universality and restitution remains uncertain, but the debate has already ensured that the virtues once taken for granted- possession, preservation, and prestige- no longer constitute an uncontested moral defense.
Which of the following best describes the author’s view of the “universal museum” ideal?
A. It remains the most effective means of preserving and interpreting the world’s artistic heritage.
B. It may still serve as a framework if museums redefine stewardship by sharing authority and collaborating with source communities.
C. The author expresses no clear opinion and merely reports the rationale offered by defenders of retention.
D. It should be replaced entirely by a system that returns all artworks to their countries of origin.
E. It was once a useful conception of stewardship, but its moral foundations have become increasingly inadequate.
Defenders of retention, often invoking the ideal of the “universal museum,” argue that art transcends geography. By situating objects from diverse civilizations side by side, museums encourage comparative understanding and present culture as a shared human achievement. They also claim a pragmatic virtue: artifacts are safeguarded under stable conditions and made accessible to an international public that might never travel to their countries of origin. In this view, returning objects risks fragmenting the global narrative of art and exposing works to political volatility or inadequate conservation.
Advocates of repatriation counter that such universalism, however noble in language, rests on a history of unequal power. Many collections were assembled through conquest, coercion, or opportunism disguised as preservation. To retain such works is, they contend, to perpetuate the asymmetries of empire and to deny communities the material anchors of their own memory. A sculpture removed from its temple or a mask stripped from its ritual context may lose precisely the cultural resonance that justifies its value in the first place.
What is emerging, then, is not a simple call for restitution but a redefinition of stewardship itself, from ownership and display toward acknowledgment and collaboration. The modern museum is being asked to function less as the custodian of other peoples’ pasts than as a partner in restoring them. Whether this transformation will reconcile the competing claims of universality and restitution remains uncertain, but the debate has already ensured that the virtues once taken for granted- possession, preservation, and prestige- no longer constitute an uncontested moral defense.
Which of the following best describes the author’s view of the “universal museum” ideal?
A. It remains the most effective means of preserving and interpreting the world’s artistic heritage.
B. It may still serve as a framework if museums redefine stewardship by sharing authority and collaborating with source communities.
C. The author expresses no clear opinion and merely reports the rationale offered by defenders of retention.
D. It should be replaced entirely by a system that returns all artworks to their countries of origin.
E. It was once a useful conception of stewardship, but its moral foundations have become increasingly inadequate.
14 Oct 2025, 18:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
When Lord Elgin removed portions of the Parthenon’s sculptural frieze in the early nineteenth century, his actions reflected the prevailing assumption that great art belonged wherever it could be most carefully preserved and most widely admired. Two centuries later, those same marbles, housed in London’s British Museum, stand at the center of a moral dispute less about art itself than about the changing meaning of cultural stewardship. The question of whether such artifacts should remain in Western institutions or be returned to their places of origin now engages not merely legal ownership but evolving conceptions of historical justice and global heritage.
Defenders of retention, often invoking the ideal of the “universal museum,” argue that art transcends geography. By situating objects from diverse civilizations side by side, museums encourage comparative understanding and present culture as a shared human achievement. They also claim a pragmatic virtue: artifacts are safeguarded under stable conditions and made accessible to an international public that might never travel to their countries of origin. In this view, returning objects risks fragmenting the global narrative of art and exposing works to political volatility or inadequate conservation.
Advocates of repatriation counter that such universalism, however noble in language, rests on a history of unequal power. Many collections were assembled through conquest, coercion, or opportunism disguised as preservation. To retain such works is, they contend, to perpetuate the asymmetries of empire and to deny communities the material anchors of their own memory. A sculpture removed from its temple or a mask stripped from its ritual context may lose precisely the cultural resonance that justifies its value in the first place.
What is emerging, then, is not a simple call for restitution but a redefinition of stewardship itself, from ownership and display toward acknowledgment and collaboration. The modern museum is being asked to function less as the custodian of other peoples’ pasts than as a partner in restoring them. Whether this transformation will reconcile the competing claims of universality and restitution remains uncertain, but the debate has already ensured that the virtues once taken for granted- possession, preservation, and prestige- no longer constitute an uncontested moral defense.
Which of the following best describes the author’s view of the “universal museum” ideal?
A. It remains the most effective means of preserving and interpreting the world’s artistic heritage.
B. It may still serve as a framework if museums redefine stewardship by sharing authority and collaborating with source communities.
C. The author expresses no clear opinion and merely reports the rationale offered by defenders of retention.
D. It should be replaced entirely by a system that returns all artworks to their countries of origin.
E. It was once a useful conception of stewardship, but its moral foundations have become increasingly inadequate.
A) Incorrect. The author notes that possession, preservation, and prestige “no longer constitute an uncontested moral defense.” This indicates doubt about the universal museum’s continued effectiveness as the best model.
B) Incorrect. The passage does mention a shift toward partnership and shared authority, yet the author does not say that such changes will save the universal museum ideal. The outcome is called “uncertain,” so claiming it “may still serve as a framework” goes beyond what is stated.
C) Incorrect. The author does more than report defenders’ rationale. The text evaluates that rationale, pointing out its limitations and noting that its moral defense is now contested.
D) Incorrect. The author does not call for returning all artworks to their countries of origin. The passage discusses collaboration and acknowledgment rather than total restitution.
E) Correct Answer. The universal museum was once seen as a virtuous model, but the author explains that its moral foundations are now questioned. The phrase “virtues once taken for granted... no longer constitute an uncontested moral defense” shows that the ideal has become inadequate in the current ethical climate.
Answer: E
When Lord Elgin removed portions of the Parthenon’s sculptural frieze in the early nineteenth century, his actions reflected the prevailing assumption that great art belonged wherever it could be most carefully preserved and most widely admired. Two centuries later, those same marbles, housed in London’s British Museum, stand at the center of a moral dispute less about art itself than about the changing meaning of cultural stewardship. The question of whether such artifacts should remain in Western institutions or be returned to their places of origin now engages not merely legal ownership but evolving conceptions of historical justice and global heritage.
Defenders of retention, often invoking the ideal of the “universal museum,” argue that art transcends geography. By situating objects from diverse civilizations side by side, museums encourage comparative understanding and present culture as a shared human achievement. They also claim a pragmatic virtue: artifacts are safeguarded under stable conditions and made accessible to an international public that might never travel to their countries of origin. In this view, returning objects risks fragmenting the global narrative of art and exposing works to political volatility or inadequate conservation.
Advocates of repatriation counter that such universalism, however noble in language, rests on a history of unequal power. Many collections were assembled through conquest, coercion, or opportunism disguised as preservation. To retain such works is, they contend, to perpetuate the asymmetries of empire and to deny communities the material anchors of their own memory. A sculpture removed from its temple or a mask stripped from its ritual context may lose precisely the cultural resonance that justifies its value in the first place.
What is emerging, then, is not a simple call for restitution but a redefinition of stewardship itself, from ownership and display toward acknowledgment and collaboration. The modern museum is being asked to function less as the custodian of other peoples’ pasts than as a partner in restoring them. Whether this transformation will reconcile the competing claims of universality and restitution remains uncertain, but the debate has already ensured that the virtues once taken for granted- possession, preservation, and prestige- no longer constitute an uncontested moral defense.
Which of the following best describes the author’s view of the “universal museum” ideal?
A. It remains the most effective means of preserving and interpreting the world’s artistic heritage.
B. It may still serve as a framework if museums redefine stewardship by sharing authority and collaborating with source communities.
C. The author expresses no clear opinion and merely reports the rationale offered by defenders of retention.
D. It should be replaced entirely by a system that returns all artworks to their countries of origin.
E. It was once a useful conception of stewardship, but its moral foundations have become increasingly inadequate.
A) Incorrect. The author notes that possession, preservation, and prestige “no longer constitute an uncontested moral defense.” This indicates doubt about the universal museum’s continued effectiveness as the best model.
B) Incorrect. The passage does mention a shift toward partnership and shared authority, yet the author does not say that such changes will save the universal museum ideal. The outcome is called “uncertain,” so claiming it “may still serve as a framework” goes beyond what is stated.
C) Incorrect. The author does more than report defenders’ rationale. The text evaluates that rationale, pointing out its limitations and noting that its moral defense is now contested.
D) Incorrect. The author does not call for returning all artworks to their countries of origin. The passage discusses collaboration and acknowledgment rather than total restitution.
E) Correct Answer. The universal museum was once seen as a virtuous model, but the author explains that its moral foundations are now questioned. The phrase “virtues once taken for granted... no longer constitute an uncontested moral defense” shows that the ideal has become inadequate in the current ethical climate.
Answer: E
25 Apr 2026, 02:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
I did not quite understand the question and I don’t quite agree with the solution. You cannot assume that the author thinks it was "a useful conception of stewardship". That is completely out of scope.
