When restorers cleaned Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling in the 1980s, they removed centuries of candle soot and varnish to reveal unexpectedly bright colors. Some critics argued that the restorers had stripped away Michelangelo's final glazes, fundamentally altering his vision. Others countered that the dark appearance was simply accumulated grime, not artistic intention. The debate reflects broader tensions between preservation and restoration in art conservation.
It can be inferred from the text that
all art historians agree that cleaning improved the Sistine Chapel
Michelangelo explicitly documented his color preferences
determining an artist's original intent can sometimes be uncertain many years after creation
the Sistine Chapel should never have been restored
Correct Answer: C
Choice C is the best answer. Experts disagree about what Michelangelo actually intended.
- Context clues: "Some critics argued" one thing; "others countered" another about original intent.
- Meaning: The disagreement shows we can't definitively know the artist's intention centuries later.
- Verify: The unresolved "debate" confirms the uncertainty.
💡 Strategy: When experts disagree about historical facts, infer that certainty is unattainable.
Choice A is incorrect because critics "argued" against the restoration. Choice B is incorrect because debating his intent implies no clear documentation. Choice D is incorrect because the passage presents both sides without judgment.