LSAT 24, Reading Comprehension, Q22, LSATHacks

RC Question 22 Explanation, by LSATHacks

DISCUSSION: The first paragraph tells us the purpose of the passage. Lines 1-2 give us a definition of fake art.

Line 6 shows the author thinks it’s doubtful we can truly call any work original. The author thinks the book should have been called Original?

The rest of the passage gives examples of art that is hard to classify as original or derivative.

___________

1. This isn’t true. Medieval Europe didn’t have fakes (lines 20-23), and the third paragraph implies that many foreign cultures don’t even have the concept of “fake”.
2. The author never says exactly what makes a painting important.
3. The author never addresses this question.
4. CORRECT. This describes the first paragraph. We can say when art is fake (lines 1-2), but it’s not always clear what we can call “original”.
   The rest of the paragraph uses examples to illustrate the point of the first paragraph.

   A “Roman copy of a Greek original” was once a fake but now to us the statues are original. An African mask may be fake to us but original to a Bambaran. The second and third paragraphs exist to help prove the point mentioned in this answer.

5. This is close to what lines 15-16 say. Fake art needs an art market. But the passage never says the market has to be international.

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.