tpo8

The reading and the listening passage both discuss the accuracy of Chevalier de Seingalt's memoir. While the author of the article raises three doubts about his memoir to make his life more fascinating, the lecturer disputes the claims presented in the article. In fact, the professor believes Chevalier's memoir is pretty accurate and addresses, in detail, the problem with each claim made in the reading text.
First and foremost, the reading passage states it is false that Chevalier was a wealthy man from Swiss as depicted in his biography. He goes on to correlate this statement with the fact that he took a loan from a Swiss merchant. The lecturer, however, asserts that Chevalier's wealth was assets that had to be sold. He additionally points out that this does not mean he was necessarily poor. It just required time for his assets to be converted into cash.
Secondly, the author claims it is impossible for him to memorize the conversations he had with the well-known composer Voltaire. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He averts this by mentioning how he would keep a record immediately after he had conversed and kept the notes for a long time. He goes on to say that there are witnesses who used to live with him, proving that he used to keep notes and journals.
Finally, the writer puts forth the idea that Chevalier escaped the prison by bribing the system. In contrast, the lecturer’s stance is that there were many other prisoners who had more power and money and nobody could bride their way out. He notes that in Venician documents the prison ceiling had to be repaired. Moreover, he points out that if Chevalier did not escape as it was described why would this case be documented.
To sum up, the reading and the listening both hold conflicting views about the truth of Chevalier’s biography. It is clear that they will have trouble finding common ground on this issue.