Art critic: After a lacquer work allegedly created by the artist

Question

Art critic: After a lacquer work allegedly created by the artist Michiko Suganuma was discovered to be a forgery, museum curators removed it from display, declaring it to be a mere curiosity. Yet since these curators have claimed that a piece of decorative art should be judged only by its inherent properties, independently of its history, they were obviously inconsistent in their decision to remove the piece.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the art critic’s argument?

A. Tiny imperfections in the work’s layers of lacquer were what identified it as a forgery.

B. The lacquer work was created by an artist who has produced many decorative arts, but none highly sought after.

C. Other curators have claimed that a work of art can be judged by information about the artist’s career.

D. Detailed examination of the forgery revealed no significant differences from works of the same kind by Suganuma.

E. Though other works of equal quality are readily available, Suganuma’s works are still preferred by art collectors.

gorbit · Answer

The critics' argument is that the museum curators have been inconsistent because they removed this when it was discovered as a forgery, but they are not looking at the inherent properties independently of its history, whereas in fact option A is talking about the imperfections in the work itself, and hence that is an inherent property. If this statement were to be true, then the critic's argument is incorrect, since the curators would be consistent with their methods of removal of this forgery.

Aprilhaa · Answer

But isn’t imperfection part of any art work including the original?
I can understand the key is to find contradictory in museum’s action, but option A just doesn’t add up.

dotsoftme · Answer

The correct answer is  A. Tiny imperfections in the work’s layers of lacquer were what identified it as a forgery. 
 Why this weakens the argument: 
The art critic’s argument hinges on a charge of  inconsistency . The critic argues that:
 
 The curators believe decorative art should be judged  only  by its  inherent properties  (what the object physically is, separate from its history). 
 Yet, when they found out its  history  was fake (it was a forgery, not a Suganuma), they removed it. 
 Therefore, the critic concludes, the curators broke their own rule by judging it based on its history.  
To weaken this argument, we need to show that the curators  didn't  necessarily break their rule—that they could have removed the piece based on its  inherent properties  alone.
If  Option A  is true, the piece was discovered to be a forgery precisely because of "tiny imperfections in the work's layers of lacquer." These imperfections are physical, structural flaws—in other words,  inherent properties  of the object itself. By removing a piece that has physical defects, the curators are acting perfectly consistently with their philosophy of judging art solely by its inherent properties.
 Why the other options are incorrect: 
 
  B. The lacquer work was created by an artist who has produced many decorative arts, but none highly sought after.  Who actually made the forgery is a matter of  history , not inherent property. This does not address the critic's core attack on the curators' consistency. 
  C. Other curators have claimed that a work of art can be judged by information about the artist’s career.  What  other  curators believe is irrelevant. The critic is specifically targeting the behavior and stated philosophy of  these  particular curators. 
  D. Detailed examination of the forgery revealed no significant differences from works of the same kind by Suganuma.  This actually  strengthens  the critic's argument. If the physical piece is identical to a real Suganuma (meaning its inherent properties are excellent), then the only reason the curators removed it must have been its history (that it's a forgery). 
  E. Though other works of equal quality are readily available, Suganuma’s works are still preferred by art collectors.  Market preferences of collectors do not change or explain the internal logical consistency of the curators' decision.

Aprilhaa · Answer

Ok thanks! You’ve been very helpful!

Art critic: After a lacquer work allegedly created by the artist

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 critic: After a lacquer work allegedly created by the artist

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