The Sumpton town council recently voted to pay a prominent artist to create an abstract sculpture for the town square....
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
The Sumpton town council recently voted to pay a prominent artist to create an abstract sculpture for the town square. Critics of this decision protested that town residents tend to dislike most abstract art, and any art in the town square should reflect their tastes. But a town council spokesperson dismissed this criticism, pointing out that other public abstract sculptures that the same sculptor has installed in other cities have been extremely popular with those cities' local residents.
The statements above most strongly suggest that the main point of disagreement between the critics and the spokesperson is whether
Passage Visualization
| Passage Statement | Visualization and Linkage |
|---|---|
| The Sumpton town council recently voted to pay a prominent artist to create an abstract sculpture for the town square. |
Establishes: Decision has been made
|
| Critics of this decision protested that town residents tend to dislike most abstract art, and any art in the town square should reflect their tastes. |
Critics' Position: Local preference should determine public art selection
|
| But a town council spokesperson dismissed this criticism, pointing out that other public abstract sculptures that the same sculptor has installed in other cities have been extremely popular with those cities' local residents. |
Spokesperson's Counter-Position: Past performance indicates likely success
Core counter-argument: Artist's proven ability transcends general preferences |
| Overall Implication |
Central Disagreement Revealed: Critics focus on: General local preferences about abstract art Spokesperson focuses on: This specific artist's ability to achieve success Fundamental conflict: Whether general tastes or specific artist capability should guide decision |
Valid Inferences
Inference: The main disagreement centers on whether the general preferences of Sumpton residents toward abstract art or the specific track record of this particular artist should be the determining factor in predicting the sculpture's reception.
Supporting Logic: Since the critics argue that Sumpton residents generally dislike abstract art and believe local tastes should govern public art choices, while the spokesperson counters by citing this specific artist's success in making abstract art popular in other cities, the core dispute is whether general local preferences about abstract art or this particular artist's proven ability to overcome such resistance should be the primary consideration. The critics treat all abstract art as equivalent in terms of local reception, while the spokesperson argues this artist's work transcends typical abstract art reactions.
Clarification Note: The passage doesn't suggest disagreement about whether residents' opinions matter, but rather about which factor - general abstract art preferences or artist-specific success patterns - better predicts how Sumpton residents will actually respond to this particular installation.
This choice misidentifies the disagreement. Neither the critics nor the spokesperson are debating whether residents should have been consulted in the decision-making process. The critics are concerned about the outcome (residents won't like it) while the spokesperson is confident about the outcome (residents will like it based on the artist's track record). The consultation process itself isn't what they're arguing about.
This perfectly captures the core disagreement. The critics believe most Sumpton residents will NOT find the sculpture to their taste because residents generally dislike abstract art. The spokesperson believes most Sumpton residents WILL find it to their taste because this particular sculptor has successfully made abstract art popular in other cities. This is exactly what they're disagreeing about - the likely reception of the sculpture by local residents.
This misses the mark because the critics aren't questioning whether the artist's previous works were actually popular elsewhere. The critics seem to accept that fact but argue it's irrelevant because Sumpton residents have different preferences. The spokesperson isn't trying to prove the popularity happened - they're using it as evidence for future success.
Neither party is discussing traditional sculptures as an alternative. The critics aren't arguing that a traditional sculpture would be better - they're arguing that this abstract sculpture will be unpopular. The spokesperson isn't comparing abstract vs. traditional art - they're defending this specific abstract sculpture based on the artist's track record.
This completely reverses the logic and isn't what either party is arguing about. The debate isn't about whether Sumpton residents' preferences would apply to other cities. Rather, the spokesperson is arguing that success in other cities predicts success in Sumpton, while critics argue Sumpton's specific preferences against abstract art will override the artist's general appeal.