Why Not A

To further clarify my reasoning, in Elaine's statement her conclusion is "Museums, therefore, should seek to acquire and display the best examples of artworks from each artistic period and genre, even if some of these works are not recognized by experts as masterpieces" Fredrick States "limited resources to acquiring the works of recognized masters in order to ensure the preservation of the greatest artworks." Does is not seem like they are disagreeing for what quailifies as great works of Art Elaine says "even if not recognized by master" Fredrick says " recognized by master, in order to ensure preservation of the GREATEST ART WORK How is A weather or not Masters recognize or indicate the greatest art work wrong ??

Hi, good question, this one is rough but I'm actually pretty sure that we can't be certain about either persons position on A. Elaine does tell us that we should preserve artworks that are the best examples of their periods, even those not considered to be masterpieces. I don't think her position commits her to saying whether or not there are currently masterpieces that are not recognized as such. She does think we should collect and preserve pieces that are not recognized as masterworks, but this could also include times and places for which there simply are not surviving masterpieces. Perhaps the best surviving examples of early Celtic art are not masterworks, but regardless, Elaine thinks that should be preserved and displayed. Fred thinks museums should only collect recognized masters. This doesn't preclude the possibility of there being unrecognized masters. Fred simply thinks we should focus on the recognized ones.