▶ Your Answer : There is an ample support for the reading passage’s claim that Laocoon is not the origin of Greek sculpture, but a forgery made by Michelangelo. However, in the lecture, the professor gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author’s point. First of all, the professor claims that Sangallo was not rival of Michelangelo, but a close friend. In detail, Michelangelo assisted with him several time to work and invited him to show Laocoon. This refutes the reading passage’s assertion that Michelangelo might have forged the Laocoon to embarrass his rival, Sangallo. Next, the professor insists that there was a similarity between Michelangelo’s painting ‘The Last Judgment’ and Laocoon because he was influenced by Laocoon. His painting was demonstrated as a Michelangelo’s reaction to Laocoon. Also, he said that discovery of Laocoon made him profound. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s argument that Laocoon’s resemblance with Michelangelo’s painting shows that they are painted by same painter, Michelangelo. Finally, the professor contends that in Renaissance, antic reproduction was popular, not forgery. To be specific, forgery was accepted as fraud and when painter used forgery, they got penalty and dead. This counters the reading passage’s claim that forgery was popular artistic practice in Renaissance so Michelangelo might have forged the Laocoon. |