PrepTest 111, Section 4, Question 26
Zachary: The term "fresco" refers to paint that(98 more words not shown)
Stephen's response to Zachary, if(9 more words not shown)
- AIt is impossible(17 more words not shown)
- BStripping away everything(24 more words not shown)
- CThe painted details(22 more words not shown)
- DNone of the(22 more words not shown)
- EMichelangelo was rarely(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What if the fresco stage wasn't the finished painting?
Zachary wants to recover Michelangelo's intended appearance, so we need to ask whether the original wet-plaster work contains that entire appearance. I also wonder what later work contributed. Did every addition take the painting farther from the artist's intention? We shouldn't decide what to remove merely from the fact that it was added later.
Stephen gives us a more specific reason to pause. Painters of that era commonly added details to their own work after the plaster dried. These aren't necessarily changes imposed by other artists; they can be part of the original artist's process. Yet Zachary's plan would strip away everything except paint applied to wet plaster.
What we’re looking for
We're asked what Stephen's response most strongly supports. My starting thought is that the fresco needn't be the artist's final intended version. Look for a conclusion about what that possibility does to the proposed restoration, without assuming that we know every detail of Michelangelo's intentions.
Working the answers
- A
The response doesn't say the layers are impossible to distinguish. We could know exactly which paint was added after the plaster dried and still have a reason to preserve some of it. Stephen questions whether removing that paint would accomplish Zachary's goal, not whether conservators could identify it.
- BCorrect
If Michelangelo followed the common practice Stephen describes, some of his own intended details were added after the plaster dried. Removing everything beyond the original fresco would remove those details too. That would take the painting away from his completed design instead of restoring it.
The response describes a widespread practice, not direct proof of exactly what Michelangelo did on every part of these paintings. But this is a strongest-support question. The practice gives us reason to doubt that stripping the paintings back to the wet-plaster stage would recover the intended appearance, which is the cautious conclusion B draws.
- C
This says the later details weren't integral to the finished design. Stephen gives us no reason to dismiss the artist's own additions that way. Details can be part of a painting's overall design even if they are applied in a later stage. If anything, the response raises the concern that stripping them off could remove something the original artist intended.
- D
Stephen says nothing about whether other painters who worked on the paintings were important artists. Their reputations wouldn't settle whether the proposed removal preserves Michelangelo's intended appearance anyway. The response focuses on original painters adding their own details after drying.
- E
Adding details after plaster dries doesn't show dissatisfaction with finished work. The later stage could have been planned from the beginning, meaning the painting wasn't finished before those details were added. We also have a statement about common practice in an era, not evidence that Michelangelo was rarely satisfied with his work.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.