CR Question

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

<p>What most of us suspect—that aesthetic appreciation is not the only engine of the art market— becomes evident when a well-known work of art is revealed as a fake. The work may not change in appearance, but it loses its value as a relic. It no longer provides a direct link to an artist of genius; it ceases to promise either spiritual refreshment to its viewer or status to its owner. Even though the work in question remains physically unaltered, our response to it is profoundly changed. In 1937 the art historian Abraham Bredius wrote of a painting entitled Christ at Emmaus, which he believed to be the work of the great seventeenth-century Dutch artist Vermeer, but which was in fact a forgery by a Dutch painter named Hans van Meegeren:
It is a wonderful moment in the life of a lover of art when he finds himself suddenly confronted with a hitherto unknown painting by a great master, on the original canvas, and without any restoration, just as it left the painter’s studio! And what a picture! … What we have here is a—I am inclined to say—the masterpiece of Jan Vermeer of Delft. After the exposure of van Meegeren, however, it became surprisingly apparent that his forgeries were grotesquely ugly and unpleasant paintings, altogether dissimilar to Vermeer’s.</p>

<p>Apparently, this guy is admiring a forger’s work without knowing it’s a forgery. </p>

<p>The author quotes Bredius’ opinion in order to show that ______.
(A) unknown paintings by many famous artists are waiting to be found
(B) an artwork’s history affects how people judge it
(C) the totality of a work is what makes it valuable
(D) no one has found the actual Christ at Emmaus
(E) any artist’s work can be easily forged</p>

<p>Can you give the answer and explanation…</p>

2

<p>B</p>

<p>Bredius appreciates the work when he doesn’t know that it is forged. Once Poole expose the forger, everyone becomes highly critical. Thus, the history of the art has a big influence on how people perceive art.</p>

3

<p>Your answer’s right but…
How does history affect the viewer’s judgement? Nothing in the passage supports that, except for maybe “in 1937”, which if used as valid evidence for your answer, I’d say would make the CR section too difficult for everyone. I crossed off B because nothing in the passage talked about the history of the work. I chose C, which made more sense. The viewer, Bredius, liked the work because in its entirety (totality), it’s high quality work. That would be the only factor affecting his judgement.
Could you tell me how you tackled this one?</p>

4

<p>You have to look at the passage as as whole. The question asks why the author quotes Bredius. The author wouldn’t quote him in order to claim that the totality of a work is what makes it valuable because then the author would be supporting forgery. Instead, he quoted him to show how at first, when Bredius didn’t know that the work was forged, Bredius appreciated it. However, once the forger was exposed, people thought it grotesque and ugly. When Bredius thought the art was legit he liked it. When the true history or origin was shown, people hated it.</p>

<p>History = origin/authenticity/original artist in this context</p>