LSAT 145 | Section 3 | Reading Comprehension: Q9

RC Question 9 Explanation

DISCUSSION: When a question cites a specific part of the passage, you should go reread that area + some lines around it. Then prephrase the answer.

This will let you get through the answers much faster. Getting bogged down in the answers is the single biggest cause of lost time on the LSAT.

The quoted lines are at the end of paragraph 1. The author says “astonishingly”. This means that the forgery was surprisingly good. A critic was convinced of authenticity even after the forgery was admitted. Therefore, it’s very difficult to judge whether an artwork is authentic or a skillful forgery.

___________

1. Nonsense. The author is making an argument about forgeries, not about art critics. The art critics are only mentioned as evidence that The Disciples at Emmaus was excellent.
2. Ridiculous. Lines 17-21 suggest the author thought the critics were correct. He cites the fact that they were impressed as evidence the forgery was good.
3. The entire passage is about forgeries! The author doesn’t think The Disciples at Emmaus was authentic. If this answer were correct, the whole passage would have been an argument about the authenticity of the painting, rather than its artistic value.
4. The author never said this. “Internally incoherent” is incredibly strong criticism. It means that the concept of an art forgery has no meaning.
    
   That’s silly. Dictionaries and encyclopedias have had entries on art forgery for centuries. It’s a well established concept. The LSAT would never contradict such an established concept. You’d need incredibly strong evidence to choose an answer like this.
5. CORRECT. More or less. The word “astonishingly” illustrates that the forgery was so good that a well regarded critic was convinced it was authentic even after Van Meegeren admitted to the forgery.
    
   What this really means is that we can’t say a painting is aesthetically inferior merely because it’s a forgery.