PrepTest 145

Topic: Humanities

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • Author questions a common assumption about forged art (never as good as the art by the original artist) with an example (van Meegeren's Vermeer forgery fooled everyone)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Common assumption:
    • Forgeries don't have as much artistic value as original (first sentence)
  • Author's view:
    • Critics and specialists can be fooled by talented forgers (second sentence)
  • Example of forgery that fooled people, according to the author:
    • Han van Meegeren's Emmaus was initially forged as a Vermeer and seen as one of Vermeer's finest works by experts (some even after forgery revealed) (third through last sentences)
  • Author's attitude: "commonly assumed" (first sentence); "even the most prominent art specialists can be duped" (second sentence); "Astonishingly" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • Philosophers' view, questions raised by example (Are forgeries worse? Are we right to change our minds about forgeries?) and Lessing's answer previewed
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Philosophers' view:
    • Given the praise, van Meegeren's work must have had aesthetic merit (first sentence)
  • Author's questions:
    • Is forgery inherently worse? Are we right to change our minds once we learn an artwork is forged? (third and fourth sentences)
  • Author's view:
    • Lessing has "convincing answers" to these "difficult questions" (second and last sentences)
  • Author's attitude: "raises difficult questions" (second sentence); "convincing answers" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

• Paragraph note
  • Lessing's answers (even beautiful forged art is artistically worse because it lacks originality)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Lessing's view:
    • Forged art — even accomplished, beautiful forged art — is worse because it lacks originality, and originality is one of the fundamental parts of artistic merit (first, third, and fourth sentences)
  • Example of a forged art that is accomplished/beautiful, according to Lessing/the author:
    • van Meegersen's work, which has great composition, technique, and use of color (second sentence)
  • Comparisons, according to Lessing:
    • Forged art is worse than original art (first sentence)
    • A distinction is drawn between aesthetic value (how a painting looks) and artistic value (which also includes a painter's originality) (fourth sentence)
    • Forgeries can be great aesthetically, but they don't have originality (Vermeer presented new way to see; van Meegeren copied) (fourth and last sentences)
  • Author's attitude: "brilliant" (second sentence); "flawless, even beautiful" (second sentence)

Paragraph 4

• Paragraph note
  • Author applies Lessing's view to van Meegeren (came 300 years after Vermeer and lacks historical significance)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Author's view:
    • Even if Emmaus is good aesthetically, it's not original and thus lacks the historical significance that made Vermeer a great artist (first through last sentence)
  • Author's attitude: "undoubted master of Vermeer's innovative techniques" (first sentence); "truly impressive and historic achievement" (second sentence); "nothing new or creative" (second sentence); "lacks the historical significance that makes Vermeer's work artistically great" (last sentence)

Main Point: Forgeries might have aesthetic value, but they don't reflect an original view of the world, so they lack artistic value.

Question/Answer: This passage best fits the Question/Answer Meta-Structure.* In a Question/Answer passage, the author will pose a question early on before spending the rest of the passage attempting to answer that question. In this passage, the author poses two questions in the second paragraph: "Is forgery inherently worse?" and "Are we right to change our minds once we learn an artwork is forged?" The author then invokes Lessing, a philosopher who "convincing[ly]" answered these questions, before outlining Lessing's answers throughout the rest of the passage.

In a Question/Answer passage, the main point is generally the answer with which the author agrees. The author ultimately endorses Lessing's answers, so we made those answers the crux of our anticipated main point.

*We debated over whether to call this a Generalization/Example passage. After the all, the author proves a general point about artistic forgeries (they're worse because they lack originality) with an example (van Meegeren's forgery of Vermeer). We ultimately sided with Question/Answer, but if you want to call this a Generalization/Example passage, you have our blessing.

Example: We could surely call this a Generalization/Example passage; but if we didn't, the example is the most prominent minor Meta-Structure in this passage. The author returns to the van Meegeren example multiple times in this passage, so we should expect several questions about it.

Be careful with examples discussed throughout the passage, as there are two primary ways that such examples can be used. Sometimes, the example is the main point, and the passage is about that specific example. Other times, as in this passage, the point is more general, with the example being used to highlight that general point. Here, the author starts with a general discussion of forgeries and then shifts into discussing van Meegeren's Emmaus as an example of that. As such, Emmaus isn't a part of the main point, and we can select answers that don't bring it up.

Also, don't forget that the author brought up a common assumption, so we should know how the author eventually feels about it. But be careful, as there's a subtlety to it! The common assumption is that forgeries don't have as much "aesthetic merit" as an original (P1, S1). It would be easy to say that the author thinks this assumption is wrong, but they don't. In fact, the author brings up the possibility that at least one forgery was "aesthetically superior" to the original (P4, S1). The author questions the assumption by making a distinction the assumption doesn't consider — the difference between aesthetics and art (P3, S4). And from this, the author shows that the assumption is right but not the relevant question — forgeries can be aesthetically superior, but they can't be artistically superior because they lack originality.

Finally, as with any passage that makes a distinction, let's always think about it as we read through the answers. It's common for answers to be right except for failing to use the right "part" of the distinction. Here, the author made a point of distinguishing between artistic value and aesthetic value, and so we should expect some answers to be wrong because they use the wrong one of those terms.