Q25 - Owners of any work of art

[ywan1990]

I could see the reason why (B)-(E) are all incorrect, but I am not sure why (A) is correct.

I'm quite certain that Shanna would support the statement made in (A). But I think Jorge's attitude should be rather unknown because the statement in (A) does not mention if the work is unique and Jorge's statement only deals with unique works.

[maryadkins]

I'm with you. It's imperfect. It's just clearly the best answer of the five. We have to assume the portrait is unique. But maybe that's not such an assumption--isn't every original piece of art inherently unique because there is only one of it?

[zainrizvi]

Wouldn't A work because it says the the fact that it is unflattering is SUFFICIENT. Jorge would disagree because he thinks that it is not sufficient by itself - you have to consider whether it is unique or not.

[soyeonjeon]

Can someone please help us understand this one?
I chose E for it, but now I see that Jorge stated moral right, so E can be ruled out. D seems reversed.

A is quite unexpected, can someone help?

Thanks.

[rinagoldfield]

Hey TZ,

(A) represents something Shanna would likely agree with and Jorge would likely disagree with.

I want to see my father depicted well, so an unflattering portrait is probably morally and aesthetically offensive to me. Shanna argues that morally and aesthetically offensive artworks can be destroyed by their owners. Shanna says: destroy the portrait!

Jorge, however, believes that no unique artwork should be destroyed, even if it is offensive to the owner. But we don’t know if this artwork is unique. Jorge says: don’t destroy the portrait! Check if it’s unique first!

(E) is out for the reason you say, TZ. Shanna and Jorge talk about ethical/moral rights, not legal rights.

(D) is only half-scope. Jorge talks specifically about unique works of art. We don’t know what he thinks about non-unique ones, so we don’t know if he would agree or disagree with any statement about them.


#officialexplanation

[BackoftheEnvelope]

I also had it down to (E) and (A) before choosing (A).

(E) is clearly incorrect because we do not know what is and isn’t “legally permissible." (E) introduces information outside the scope of the stimulus. Neither Shanna nor Jorge can be said to have an opinion on the matter. What likely trips people up with this AC, if you didn't do a careful read, is "legal owner" in the stimulus.

However, for (A) to be correct, a portrait presenting a father "in an unflattering light" would have to be (1) "morally or aesthetically distasteful" (Shanna) and (2) "a unique work of art with aesthetic or historical value" (Jorge). Such a portrait would be aesthetically distasteful (satisfying Shanna's conditional) and could arguably have historical value (satisfying Jorge's conditional) in being preserved for subsequent generations of the family. Think about it: Wouldn't it be cool to come across an "unflattering" portrait of an ancestor rather than the boring, stone-faced portraits that are so common? The portrait could also have aesthetic value simply in virtue of being unflattering.

This question definitely requires being more creative in your approach. Nonetheless, (B)-(E) should all be easily eliminated and (A) confirmed after some thought.

[dragonliwenxu]

A. Logically correct, despite its uncomfortable contents
E. S and J both admit that destroying is legal

Moreover, for difficult LSAT questions, the correct answer usually looks unreasonable, mysterious, powerful and grim at first glance.