During the nineteenth century

Answer choices

1. A

   Deepens the Paradox15% picked this

   In France in the nineteenth century, the French academy gave more of its financial support to painting than

   This seems to suggest the opposite of what was expected. This would make painters more dependent on the academy than sculptors.

   15%
2. B

   Too Weak13% picked this

   The French academy in the nineteenth century financially supported a greater number of sculptors than painters, but individual painters received more support,

   This makes it difficult to say whether sculptors or painters were more dependent on the French academy.

   13%
3. C

   Correct64% picked this

   Because stone was so much more expensive than paint and canvas, far more unsponsored paintings were produced than were unsponsored sculptures in

   Why this is right

   This provides one explanation for the different levels of innovation in sculpture and painting. Sculptors were dependent on support from the academy, while painters were not.

   Skill tested: Paradox · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   64%
4. D

   Out of Scope5% picked this

   Very few of the artists in France in the nineteenth century who produced sculptures

   Whether there was overlap between those who were sculptors and those who were painters is not relevant to the paradox.

   5%
5. E

   Applies to Both4% picked this

   Although the academy was the primary sponsor of sculpture and painting, the total amount of financial support that French sculptors and painters received from

   This applies to both sculptors and painters and so cannot explain the different rate of innovation between them.

   4%