Q10 - Curator: The decision to restore

[mymansupa]

I'm at a complete loss... I really don't understand how (C) os the answer... it seemed like a very strong answer...

[andyevans000]

Here's my thoughts...

The Art Critic doesn't really make a statement that refutes what the Curator is proposing. It's almost as if he didn't even listen to what the Curator says.

The Art Critic says there was a copy made soon AFTER Veronese died, and that copy had the cloak as red. And that because of this fact, it's unlikely that it was changed from green to red so soon after his death, meaning that it must have been changed sometime BEFORE his death.

As far as the answers, I found it easier to eliminate the clearly wrong ones and go from there.

A is wrong because we know nothing about the quality of copy.
B the AC makes no argument about prescribed behavior.
C basically restates my final line. Switching the cloak back to Green might restore it to its original condition (keep in mind that's not what the AC is arguing), but it won't restore it to the condition that the Art Critic asserts it was likely in when Veronese died (red).
D is wrong because the AC says nothing regarding value.
E is similarly wrong because he also says nothing about Veronese's intentions.

I got this one right, but I wasn't fully confident in C. So if someone else has a more firm answer, I'd love to hear it. Though I was a bit more assured since the other 4 answers were so clearly outside the scope of the stimulus.

[bbirdwell]

I think those are good thoughts, especially the emphasis on process of elimination.

The big takeaway from the second statement is that the change to red must've been made before he died.

So, if we make it green, it won't look like it did when he died (red).
This is why (C) is correct.

(E) is an appealing choice here, but you are correct - we know nothing of the artists's "intentions."

[greenapples]

Here is how I solved it:

Curator's conclusion: Changing RED to GREEN is justified because 1) reliable x-ray test shows RED was applied after, 2) RED was not mixed in V's workshop, leading to supporting premise that an artist other than V changed it from GREEN to RED after completion.

Art Critic's argument: A copy of V's panting soon after his death shows cloak as RED. Highly unlikely that "an artist other than V" changed from GREEN to RED because it was so soon after V's death.

My thoughts after reading the stem: Art Critic is undermining Curator's supporting premise that an artist other than V changed it from GREEN to RED. Rather, it has always been RED. This subsequently rejects the Curator's evidence in 1) and 2).

(A) We only know that the copy and V's painting shows cloak as RED. We don't have enough info to know whether they are indistinguishable. The lighting might be slightly off, brushstrokes, etc.

(B) quickly eliminate b/c this is totally out of scope.

(C) If Art Critic is undermining the argument that the cloak changed from GREEN to RED-- i.e., it has always been RED, then it logically follows that the critic could say that the proposed restoration would fail to restore V's painting to how it was at the end of artist's lifetime.

(D) quickly eliminate because there's nothing about the value.

(E) quickly eliminate because we don't know anything about V's intention. V could have originally intended it to be GREEN, but change his mind later and paint it RED.

Let me know if this makes sense!