To classify a work of art as truly great, it is necessary that the work have both originality and far-reaching influence upon the artistic community.
Principle
Originality Truly Great Art → and Far-reaching influence on art community
~Original or → ~Truly Great Art ~Far reaching influence
Evaluate
When we do these Apply the Principle type questions, we want to realize that given a principle like this, X → Y ~Y → ~X we can only use that principle to conclude that something is Y or that it is ~X.
Given the rule if you're in NYC, you're in the USA we could only use that rule to prove that someone is in the USA or to prove that someone isn't in NYC.
Lots of trap answers on Apply the Principle questions involve trying to use these rules in an illegal backwards or opposite fashion.
Goal
This rule can prove that art is not truly great, but it has no power to prove art is great, so we can quickly eliminate any answer that is using this rule to conclude that art is great.
It's also theoretically possible to use this rule to conclude that certain art is both "original and has far reaching influence", but it's almost unheard of for LSAC to apply the rule in a way where you conclude the Criteria, rather than the Judgy Term.
By "judgy term" I mean the part of the conditional that seems to express a judgment (permissible / justified / wrong / just / great, etc.)
Whenever I'm doing an Apply the Principle question, if the first way I write the conditional feels like it's putting a Judgy term on the left and Criteria on the right, I'll contrapose to make it Criteria → Judgy term