Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 29 May 2017, 19:31

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 38
Location: Dallas Texas
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 05:04
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (01:42) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 402
Location: India
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 05:29
My choice (A).
Rest of the statements cannot be infered from the passage.
Manager
Joined: 02 Jun 2004
Posts: 184
Location: Kiev, Ukraine
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 07:53
sjunagha wrote:
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.

I think that the answer is B. A almost makes it, but to me, it seems misleading.

The main discussion in the passage is about subjectivity vs. objectivity of aesthetic judgements. The argument is that contemporaty judgements are subjective, while historical can be called objective. References to Michaelangelo, Back and Shakespeare are only examples in the support of the argument.

Therefore, I think that the statements in the passage give best support to statement B. The work of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 723
Location: Milwaukee
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 10:24
sjunagha wrote:
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.

it has to be B, A is too narrow. B gives you broader perspective of what is stated in the passage
_________________

Praveen

Director
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 575
Location: San Jose, CA
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 11:17
sjunagha wrote:
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.

I will go with A

For B to be correct, shouldn't it be: "The value of contemporary work of art cannot be subjectively measured."
Director
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 575
Location: San Jose, CA
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 11:19
sjunagha wrote:
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgements as subjective and in the short term they are since critics often disagree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art. But over time the subjective element disappears. When works of art have continued to delight audiences for centuries, as have the paintings of Michelangelo, the music of bach and the plays of Shakespeare, we can objectively call them great.

The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A) When Michelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare were alive, critics disagreed about the value of their work.
(B) The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.
(C) The reputation of a work of art often fluctuates greatly from one generation to the next
(D) The mere fact that a work of art has endured for centuries does not establish its greatness.
(E) If critics agree about the value of a particular contemporary work of art, then the work can objectively be called great.

I will go with A

For B to be correct, shouldn't it be: "The value of contemporary work of art cannot be subjectively measured."
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4288
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 469 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 11:56
I believe B is an unwarranted inference. What says that there is no measure of objectivity on which Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art cannot be measured? What if that measure of objectivity is, a pure example here, their rarity or longevity?

A on the other hand can be infered. Ask yourself this question:

Why are works of art subjective? Because critics often disagree about their value.

Why was Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art subjective? Because critics disagreed about their value.
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Intern
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 20
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 12:38
Paul wrote:
I believe B is an unwarranted inference. What says that there is no measure of objectivity on which Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art cannot be measured? What if that measure of objectivity is, a pure example here, their rarity or longevity?

A on the other hand can be infered. Ask yourself this question:

Why are works of art subjective? Because critics often disagree about their value.

Why was Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art subjective? Because critics disagreed about their value.

I vote for B.
I eliminated A because "arts of Mich, Bach and Shak have continued to delight audiences for centures". "Continued" here means these works delighted audiences in the past as well. I attributed critics-from-the-past to the intire audience-from-the-past. Moreover, I see no proof that critics disagreed about the value of their work that time.

B is correct because we can call works obectively great if they continued to delight audiences for centuries.
Contemporaries could not delight audiences for centuries, therefore, can not be obectively great.

Paul, can you please point to the place saying that works of Mich, Bach and Shak were subjective? These works are objectively great!
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4288
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 469 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 13:17
The example given with Michaelangelo, Bach and Shakespeare's works of art immediately follow: "But over time the subjective element disappears". I infered from that that those examples were originally subjective
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Intern
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 38
Location: Dallas Texas
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 19:37
The OA is B- The value of contemporary work of art cannot be objectively measured.

You guys are awesome thanks for the in-depth surgery!
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4288
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 469 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 20:59
Hats off to you Serge, I did see your point after you asked me that question but I stubbornly tried to defend my irrational point
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Director
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 575
Location: San Jose, CA
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2004, 22:20

Oh! finally I got the point.
Thanks guys for detailed explnations!!!
07 Jun 2004, 22:20
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and 7 13 Mar 2011, 00:16
We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and 14 18 Nov 2008, 16:11
6 We commonly speak of aesthetic judgments as subjective, and 8 01 Feb 2008, 06:10
1 Exposure to certain chemicals commonly used in elementary 9 11 Oct 2007, 19:55
Exposure to certain chemicals commonly used in elementary 4 20 Jun 2007, 02:58
Display posts from previous: Sort by