TOEFLライティング練習模試08

Read the passage below. You have 3 minutes to read through:

Chevalier

Chevalier de Seingalt (1725–1798) recounted his life and adventures in a long memoir written toward the end of his life. The Chevalier was a controversial figure, but because of the people he met, his memoir became a valuable historical source about eighteenth-century European society. However, the accuracy of the memoir has been brought into question by critics claiming that the Chevalier distorted or invented events to make his life seem more glamorous than it was.

One point brought into question was that, in his memoir, the Chevalier claims he was very wealthy while living in Switzerland. While it was known he spent large amounts of money on parties and gambling there, evidence has recently surfaced showing that the Chevalier borrowed large sums from a Swiss merchant. Critics argue that because of his need for borrowing money he could not have really been very rich.

Critics also question the accuracy of the conversations the Chevalier records in his memoir between himself and the famous writer Voltaire. There is no doubt that these two men met and conversed; however, critics state that it is impossible for the conversations to accurately be captured because they were recorded many years after they occurred. Critics point out that exact phrases from the extended conversation held years before are impossible to remember.

Another disputed event is the Chevalier’s account of his escape from a notorious prison in Venice, Italy. The Chevalier claims he used a piece of metal to make a hole in the ceiling and climb out of his cell. Critics argue that, while it makes for enjoyable reading, it is more likely that the jailers were bribed to free him. They note that the Chevalier had many politically well-connected friends in Venice capable of offering a bribe.

Both the reading passage and lecture cover Chevalier de Seingalt’s autobiographical memoir. While the author of the reading passage questions the memoir’s accuracy, the lecturer provides three reasons to defend the memoir.
First, the reading brings up evidence that the Chevalier was in debt, meaning he could not have been wealthy. The professor refutes this, explaining that the Chevalier was rich in assets, but occasionally borrowed funds. According to the professor, being low on cash funds is not the same as being financially poor.

Second, the reading states that the memoir is fraudulent in light of the Chevalier’s claimed ability to remember exact conversations with Voltaire. Nevertheless, the lecturer argues that the Chevalier’s habit of recording each conversation with Voltaire explains his ability to recall those discussions in detail. Moreover, the lecturer feels that this has been confirmed by those who knew the Chevalier.

Finally, the author believes that the Chevalier’s retelling of his incredible prison escape is fictitious, and that bribery is the more likely explanation. On the other hand, the professor refutes this idea of bribery. He says even very wealthy prisoners were often unable to successfully bribe their way out. Additionally, the lecturer notes the existence of some government papers as strong evidence that the Chevalier’s escape has been recorded.

In conclusion, although the reading and the lecture are both about the validity of the Chevalier’s memoir, the lecturer effectively disputes all the three of the main points made in the reading.

A local university is planning the development of a new research center, however, there are two vastly different opinions concerning the type of research center that should be developed in our country. One side wants to develop a business research center and the other, an agricultural research center. Considering the current situation in China, I strongly recommend the former as it would help solve the urgent problems that our country is currently facing.

First of all, a business research center would help develop the economy. At present, the global economy is slowing down and there is no evidence indicating that recovery will occur anytime soon. Our biggest trading partners, including the United States and Japan, have fallen into economic plight. As a result, the exportations to those countries and direct investment from them are decreasing. The most important task is to keep the economy growing stably. The center would surely contribute to the accomplishment of this task by exploring new business opportunities to increase exports and helping enterprises adapt.

Secondly, a business research center would help solve the problem of unemployment. The reform of state-owned enterprises caused a large number of workers employed by those enterprises to lose their jobs. Our economic reform and adjustment are going through a vital stage. A business research center would help the enterprises figure out how to solve this problem and create new opportunities for the unemployed to get jobs in new business fields.

Finally, it would help to solve China’s rural problems. China has a huge population and nearly 70 percent of its population is farmers; there are 700 million farmers in China. Now the rural problem is focused on finding jobs for farmers who have been released from arable lands with the development of new technology. A business research center would help develop the rural economy in the industrial and service fields which could absorb the enormous number of farmers.

Therefore, based on the reasons mentioned above, I believe that a business center would be a wiser development at present than an agricultural research center. The former would be an overall better investment, as well as a more strategic investment in our nation’s economy and people.