Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT131 S4 P3 Q18 Explanation

Sculptor Isamu Noguchi

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsAuthor OpinionHumanities

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

The Japanese American sculptor Isamu Noguchi (1904-1988) was an artist who intuitively asked—and responded to—deeply original questions. He might well have become a scientist within a standard scientific discipline, but he instead became an artist who repeatedly veered off at wide angles from the well-known courses followed by conventionally talented artists behind one particular sculpture typifies this aspect of his creativeness.

By his early twenties, Noguchi's sculptures showed such exquisite comprehension of human anatomy and deft conceptual realization that he won a Guggenheim Fellowship for travel in Europe. After arriving in Paris in 1927, Noguchi asked the Romanian-born sculptor Constantin Brancusi if he might become his student. When Brancusi said no, that he metals, other than the expensive, nonoxidizing gold, could be relied upon to give off positive-light reflections.

Noguchi wanted to create a sculpture that was purely reflective. In 1929, after returning to the United States, he met the architect and philosopher R. Buckminster Fuller, offering to sculpt a portrait of him. When Fuller heard of Noguchi's ideas regarding positive-light sculpture, he suggested using chrome-nickel steel, which Henry Ford, through Here, finally, was a permanently reflective surface, economically available in massive quantities.

In sculpting his portrait of Fuller, Noguchi did not think of it as merely a shiny alternate model of traditional, negative-light sculptures. What he saw was that completely reflective surfaces provided a fundamental invisibility of surface like that of utterly still waters, whose presence can be apprehended only when objects—a ship's mast, The viewer's awareness of the "invisible" sculpture's presence and dimensional relationships would be derived only secondarily.

Even after this stunning discovery, Noguchi remained faithful to his inquisitive nature. At the moment when his explorations had won critical recognition of the genius of his original and the next phase of his evolution.

What this question is testing

Author Opinion

Anticipate

This is an Author Opinion question. I need to find the statement the author would most agree with based on the whole passage.

The author keeps emphasizing two things: Noguchi asked fundamental questions about sculpture itself, and he kept evolving — even at the moment of recognition, he moved on. So if I ask — it's the questioning, not the consistency. That points to a contrast between fundamental questioning and consistent style.

Goal

Look for an answer that says Noguchi cared more about fundamental aesthetic questions than about maintaining consistency. Common traps:

Answers that compare Noguchi favorably to specific other sculptors — too strong, the passage doesn't make those head-to-head comparisons

Answers about Noguchi's formal training — not in the passage

Answers that flip the science-and-art relationship

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
18.

The passage offers the strongest evidence that the author would agree with which one of

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong3% picked this

    Noguchi's work in Paris contributed significantly to the art of sculpture in that it embodied solutions to problems that other sculptors, including

    The passage doesn't say Brancusi (or other sculptors) were trying unsuccessfully to overcome the negative-light limitation. Brancusi worked with what was available; Noguchi noticed the limitation. The passage doesn't set up a contest between Noguchi and Brancusi over a problem they were both trying to solve.

  2. Out of Scope12% picked this

    Noguchi's scientific approach to designing sculptures and to selecting materials for sculptures is especially remarkable in that he

    The passage doesn't mention whether Noguchi had formal scientific training. The phrase "scientist's mind" describes a habit of inquisitive questioning, not a comment on his education. The remarkable-because-untrained framing isn't in the passage.

  3. Wrong View4% picked this

    Despite the fact that Brancusi was a sculptor and Fuller was not, Fuller played a more pivotal role than did Brancusi in Noguchi's realization

    The passage gives Brancusi the role of letting Noguchi see what previous sculptors had been doing — Noguchi, with his scientist's mind, "pondered the fact that sculptors through the ages had relied exclusively upon negative light" while polishing Brancusi's sculptures. Fuller's contribution was the material (chrome-nickel steel), not helping Noguchi realize what previous sculptors had been doing. (C) flips the credit.

  4. Correct60% picked this

    Noguchi was more interested in addressing fundamental aesthetic questions than in maintaining a

    Why this is right

    The passage repeatedly emphasizes Noguchi's pursuit of fundamental questions over a consistent style. P1 says he asked "deeply original questions" and "veered off at wide angles" from conventional artists. P5 says even after his discovery won critical recognition, he "proceeded to the next phase of his evolution" — choosing further inquiry over consolidating his achievement. (D) captures that priority.

    Skill tested: Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Wrong View21% picked this

    Noguchi's work is of special interest for what it reveals not only about the value of scientific thinking in the arts but also about

    The passage discusses scientific thinking applied to art (Noguchi's "scientist's mind" examining sculpture's history), not aesthetic approaches applied to scientific inquiry. The reverse direction — what art could teach science — isn't something the passage develops.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free