LSAT 106 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q10

LR Question 10 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Curator: The decision to restore the cloak of the…

QUESTION TYPE: Most Strongly Supported

ARGUMENTS: The curator thinks that we should change the cloak’s color to green. Veronese didn’t originally paint the cloak red, and the red wasn’t mixed in his studio.

The art critic points out that a copy of the painting showed a red cloak. The copy was made shortly after Veronese died. The critic thinks it’s unlikely a false copy would have been made so soon.

ANALYSIS: Just about the only thing we can conclude from the art critic’s evidence is that the cloak was red at the time the copy was made. It would have been strange to copy the painting exactly but change the color of the cloak.

___________

1. The original painting had a green cloak (before it was changed) while the copy had a red cloak.
2. The art critic doesn’t even mention equipment. And we did test with equipment. That’s how we know the cloak is green.
3. CORRECT. The copyist likely made the cloak red because the cloak in Veronese’s painting was red at that time.
4. This is a very broad statement. Further, the art critic is arguing that Veronese’s painting wasn’t tampered with. It would have been strange if another artist tampered with Veronese’s painting during his lifetime.
5. We have no clue what Veronese’s original intent was.

Recap: The question begins with “Curator: The decision to restore the cloak of the”. It is a Most Strongly Supported question. Learn more about LSAT MSS questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.