PrepTest 78, Passage 2, Question 10
Transcript
The passage raises all of the following as complications for the social historical interpretation of art except. So this is a must be true except question, four of your answer choices will must be true and can be mapped directly back onto the passage, one of them cannot. That's gonna be your correct answer. So the correct answer here is D, patrons who bought artwork solely for the purpose of reselling that artwork for profit.
So that concept of commissioning work and reselling it later for a profit was not something that's discussed, really are all in the passage. So, this is the correct answer, this is not cited as a complication of the social historic interpretations. But let's look at the answer choices and map them back onto the passage. Artists who subverted the ideas of patrons for reasons of their own.
So, this is around 27 through 31, the passage discusses this and then you can see the author is pinpointing two types of analysis or two reasons for the analysis that Taruskin and his colleagues sort of introduce, and things that need to be considered or assumptions that Taruskin is making, and that's that the artists are not subverting the ideas for their own reasons. So, check mark here, this is addressed in the passage, we can eliminate this as a correct answer.
Answer choice B, patrons who had eccentric tastes not reflective of the ideas of the elite class. So we see this towards the ends of the passage on lines 40 through 45. As a result of more talented artists sometimes had to find a place in the margins, engaged by a rich patron with eccentric tastes, for example. So check box here.
We can eliminate this as our possible answer choice since this directly addresses or brought up as a complication in the passage. Answer choice C, patrons whose taste was unlikely to produce art that endured. So, the author mentioned this in the lines 35 and 36, the taste of the aristocracy and the upper middle class has not always been apt to produce art that endures. And answer choice E, patrons who unwillingly bought artwork that conflicted with their values.
So, this was something that was brought up in lines 42 through 48. So, moreover, a great deal of art that went against the grain of elite values was paid for by the establishment unwillingly. And with misgiving. So, this is another of the complications that the author mentions to sort of advance their point that perhaps, Taruskin's perspective isn't necessarily on point.
But this is another one of the sort of criticisms brought up that complicate the social historical approach. So, we can eliminate this as a possible answer.
Read full transcriptSo that concept of commissioning work and reselling it later for a profit was not something that's discussed, really are all in the passage. So, this is the correct answer, this is not cited as a complication of the social historic interpretations. But let's look at the answer choices and map them back onto the passage. Artists who subverted the ideas of patrons for reasons of their own.
So, this is around 27 through 31, the passage discusses this and then you can see the author is pinpointing two types of analysis or two reasons for the analysis that Taruskin and his colleagues sort of introduce, and things that need to be considered or assumptions that Taruskin is making, and that's that the artists are not subverting the ideas for their own reasons. So, check mark here, this is addressed in the passage, we can eliminate this as a correct answer.
Answer choice B, patrons who had eccentric tastes not reflective of the ideas of the elite class. So we see this towards the ends of the passage on lines 40 through 45. As a result of more talented artists sometimes had to find a place in the margins, engaged by a rich patron with eccentric tastes, for example. So check box here.
We can eliminate this as our possible answer choice since this directly addresses or brought up as a complication in the passage. Answer choice C, patrons whose taste was unlikely to produce art that endured. So, the author mentioned this in the lines 35 and 36, the taste of the aristocracy and the upper middle class has not always been apt to produce art that endures. And answer choice E, patrons who unwillingly bought artwork that conflicted with their values.
So, this was something that was brought up in lines 42 through 48. So, moreover, a great deal of art that went against the grain of elite values was paid for by the establishment unwillingly. And with misgiving. So, this is another of the complications that the author mentions to sort of advance their point that perhaps, Taruskin's perspective isn't necessarily on point.
But this is another one of the sort of criticisms brought up that complicate the social historical approach. So, we can eliminate this as a possible answer.
