▶ Your Answer :
In
the lecture, the lecturer asserts that the reading’s assertion is
groundless. This casts doubt on the reading’s assertion that the Laocoon
is not an authentic work but a forgery carried out by Michelangelo. To begin with, the lecturer argues that Michelangelo did not forge to deceive G. Sangallo. Sangallo was actually close friend of Michelangelo’s friend and
he helped Michelangelo with a lot of projects. He also asked
Michelangelo to identify the discovery of the Laocoon. Michelangelo did not want would not have wanted to trick his friend. This refutes the reading’s claim that Michelangelo forged to fool his friend. Second,
the speaker contends that the reason of resemblance between the Laocoon
and the Last Judgment was not Michelangelo’s forgery. Michelangelo even
said that the discovery of the Laocoon
had affected on his later works. Therefore the similarity of the two
works can be explained. This is contradictory to the reading’s
insistence that the forgery is supported by the Laocoon’s resemblance to
The Last Judgment. Lastly, the lecturer maintains that forgery was not neither common and nor accepted
during Michelangelo’s period. Of course, replication of art works was
very popular by many art buyers but they knew those works were not real,
which was an accepted
practice. However, forgery was a fraud and the penalty of forgery was
up to death in extreme cases. This contradicts the reading’s argument
that forgery was a common and accepted artistic practice during the
Renaissance. Writing 0-30 scale Good(26-28) 전반적으로 reading passage와 listening passage의 주장을 잘 정리하고 요약하였습니다. 오타가 종종 있는데, 사소해 보이는 실수라도 반복, 누적되면 감점 요인이 될 수 있습니다. 조금 더 꼼꼼하게 글을 작성하고, 완성한 뒤에는 반드시 다시 읽어보는 시간을 가지세요.
|