The lecturer says that the painting,
Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet, is truly worked by Rembrandt.
This counters the reading passage's claim that the painting could not be a work
by Rembrandt.
To
begin with, the lecturer claims that pigments must be added after one hundred
years from the time when the painting was painted to increase the value of the
painting. (Unclear meaning) So, it could generate the inconsistency of it. This goes against the
reading passage's claim that because of such an inconsistency, the painting is
not Rembrandt painting.
On
top of that, the lecturer points out that, in fact, the woman in the painting
is wearing simple light-colored clothes. Thus, it reflects light. (What are you going to explain?) As a result,
the face is not in partial shadow. This casts doubt on the reading passage's
claim that Rembrandt would never have made such an error.
Finally, the lecturer asserts that several
pieces of wood were used which were also for improving the value of the painting.
But originally, the painting was painted on one single piece of wood which
Rembrandt usually used. This is in opposition to the reading passage's claim
that several pieces of wood glued together are also a proper evidence that
Rembrandt did not paint it.
채점기준표 | Grammar | Contents | Example | Coherence |
점수 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Score | Limited 10-15 | - 제시된 문장들이 서로 긴밀하게 연결되어 있지 않고, 또 다른 새로운 문장으로 나타나는 느낌이 들어요. - 모호한 문장들에 대하여 수정이 필요하며, 주요포인트의 경우에는 추가적인 설명을 보충해주시기 바랍니다. - worked by 보다는 made/created by가, painting 보다는 artwork가 더 적절해보입니다.
|