▶ Your Answer :
The reading passage contends that Michelangelo’s Laocoon is a forgery actually, not the a original sculpture in Greek. On the other hand, the lecturer brings up several points that contradict this argument. First of all, the lecturer points out that Michelangelo might not have forged the Laocoon in order to fool his rival, Giuliano da Sangallo. This is attributed to the fact that Giuliano da Sangallo is was virtually his friend, not his rival. Besides, he even invited Michelangelo to help identify the Laocoon. This refutes the author’s point that Michelangelo’s Laocoon might have been forged to fool his friend. Moreover, in the lecture, the point is made that the Laocoon’s outstanding resemblance to a figure in The Last Judgment, Michelangelo’s painting supports (반대가 아닌지?) the forgery hypothesis. This is because The Last Judgment just had a substantial effect on the Laocoon. This casts doubt on the idea in the reading passage that the similarity of both works was based on the forgery theory. The final point made by lecturer is that the fact that during the Renaissance forgery was a routine and accepted artistic practice is not convincing enough to explain why the Laocoon might be a forgery by Michelangelo. This is obvious that (주관적 판단을 배제하세요.) Forgery was regarded an offense at that time, so the person who forged even could be sentenced to death. This is different from the passage’s (무슨 passage? reading도 listening도 둘 다 passage는 passage입니다.) view that artists of the time copied freely freey copied ancient works and their contemporaries’ pieces and Michelangelo’s action, forging might be natural. Writing 0-30 scale Fair(23-25) 전반적으로 reading passage와 listening passage의 주장을 잘 정리하고 요약하였습니다. 다만 문장을 애매하게 쓰거나 사실 관계를 정반대로 서술한 문장이 있습니다. 사소해 보이는 실수라도 반복, 누적되면 감점 요인이 될 수 있습니다. 조금 더 꼼꼼하게 글을 작성하고, 완성한 뒤에는 반드시 다시 읽어보는 시간을 가지세요. |