Q8

[alana.canfield]

I was debating between B and E for a while. I still am having trouble seeing exactly why E is wrong (both seem to be appropriate). The only thing I can think of is that maybe E is wrong because it calls Licthenstein's art sophisticated but the passage never actually deems it sophisticated? Any/all insight is welcome. Thanks!

[noah]

Sure - I remember thinking this was a really tough question.

The first thing is that you'll want to read for the scale. It gets set up pretty clearly at the beginning of the third paragraph where we see the author arguing that Lichtenstein was not simply rebelling - there was more to it. Then the author goes on to tell us all the great things in that "more to it."

Let's work wrong-to-right

(A) starts off good, but end with an unsupported statement. We don't learn that Lichtenstein is trying to re-create anything.

(B) looks good

(C) is out of scope - there's no discussion of his work being recognized as fine art.

(D) looks good too!

(E) is tempting, but where's the discussion of parody? Also, do we really learn his art is sophisticated for reconciling anything?

Back to (B). First part: not only parody. Check. Second part: also going for realism and nostalgia. Check

Let's hopefully eliminate (D). First part: not only parody. Check. Second part: rebelling against only last part of abstract expressionism. Check. BUT where's the nice stuff in the last paragraph.

Seems like we felt different answers were tempting, but I hope that was helpful regardless.

BTW, I love this passage - not only is it a tricky scale, it's also helped me sound much more informed about pop art.

[agersh144]

In answer choice (c) Fine art is supported by line 54 his persistent use of comic art conventions demonstrates a faith in reconciliation not only between cartoon and fine art but between parody and true feeling.

So breaking C down

Obscures the emotional complexity contained in paintings & prevented his work from being recognized as fine art in the expressionist tradition
Support: Fine art at first "difficult to see" - 11-12
Support: His merger generated a "complex result" 5-6
Support: Beneath its cartoonish methods (i.e. comic book elements) fills his paintings with an "inner sweetness" (inner sweetness i.e evocative emotional/visceral response to the aesthetic stimuli)

Sure - I remember thinking this was a really tough question.

The first thing is that you'll want to read for the scale. It gets set up pretty clearly at the beginning of the third paragraph where we see the author arguing that Lichtenstein was not simply rebelling - there was more to it. Then the author goes on to tell us all the great things in that "more to it."

Let's work wrong-to-right

(A) starts off good, but end with an unsupported statement. We don't learn that Lichtenstein is trying to re-create anything.

(B) looks good

(C) is out of scope - there's no discussion of his work being recognized as fine art.

(D) looks good too!

(E) is tempting, but where's the discussion of parody? Also, do we really learn his art is sophisticated for reconciling anything?

Back to (B). First part: not only parody. Check. Second part: also going for realism and nostalgia. Check

Let's hopefully eliminate (D). First part: not only parody. Check. Second part: rebelling against only last part of abstract expressionism. Check. BUT where's the nice stuff in the last paragraph.

Seems like we felt different answers were tempting, but I hope that was helpful regardless.

BTW, I love this passage - not only is it a tricky scale, it's also helped me sound much more informed about pop art.

[ohthatpatrick]

I take your non-question to be: "Say what? Tell me more about how (C) is wrong?"

I think Noah was saying that although the AUTHOR of this passage might agree that Lichtenstein's art was fine art, there's no discussion in the passage of the art community generally failing to recognize Lichtenstein as a fine artist in the expressionist tradition.

I actually don't even think that the author would rank Licht as a fine artist in the expressionist tradition.

Just because early expressionists and Licht both exhibited earnest emotions doesn't mean we place them in the same artistic tradition.

Far more salient to that categorization would probably be that expressionists drew NON-representational paintings, while Licht's are clearly depicting people/places/things/words.

The passage that (C) describes is one in which the author is lobbying for the world to give an artist more recognition than he/she is currently receiving.

Do you get that feeling from this passage?

Line 11-12 indeed says that it was difficult at first to see that L's images were fine art. But do people CURRENTLY neglect to see them as fine art? (C) is not just a reference to the past but an active commentary on the present, so line 11-12 is not enough to support the contention that people currently fail to recognize L as fine art.

Hope this helps.

[agersh144]

That def. helps, appreciate the explanation patrick, thanks!