Integrated Essay (Structure – A)

The text and the lecture offer two opposing views about the accuracy of Chevalier de
Seingalt’s memoir. While the text lists reasons to be suspicious of the book’s details, the
professor counters those specific points and supports the memoir. She uses other historical
information about Chevalier and his memoir to come to her conclusions.

First, the professor refutes the idea that the Chevalier was poor. She states that he was
actually wealthy, but his wealth was in property. Although the passage uses his loans as a
sign of poverty, the professor believes that they were only necessary only because he needed
time to convert his wealth into cash.

Next, the professor says that the conversations between the Chevalier and Voltaire
were probably based on notes. He wrote everything in a journal after each conversation.
Although the passage doubts the accuracy of the conversations, the professors asserts that the
book was reasonable accurate, because witnesses said that the Chevalier referred to Journals
while writing the book.

Finally, the professor dismisses the critics opinion that the Chevalier brought his
freedom rather than escaping through the ceiling of his cell. Because she says that the ceiling
cell had to be repaired after the escape and no other wealthy prisoners were able to escape
from the prison. Therefore, the Chevalier’s memoir was reasonably accurate about the
Chevalier’s escape from the Venetian prison by using a metal to dig a hole in the ceiling and
climbing through the roof.

From the above information, it can be said that the professor’s arguments successfully
counters the texts doubts on the accuracy of the Chevalier de Seingalt’s memoir.
 Integrated Essay (Structure – B)

The text and the lecture offer two opposing views about the accuracy Chevalier de
Seingalt’s memoir. While the text lists reasons to be suspicious of the memoir’s details, the
professor counters those specific points and supports the memoir’s accuracy. She uses other
historical information about the Chevalier and his book to come to her conclusions.

From the text, we learn that the accuracy of Chevalier’s book may not okay. For one,
although he claims in his memoir that he was a wealthy man during his time in Switzerland,
there were documents which show that he borrowed money. Besides that, the conversation
between the Chevalier and Voltaire was in too much detail; the reading suggests that the
Chevalier could not have memorized everything about those conversations so well. And
finally, the passage states that the Chevalier probably brought his freedom from prison rather
than escaping through the ceiling.

The professor, meanwhile, dismisses the points made in the text. She states that the
Chevalier was actually wealthy, but his wealth was in property. While the passage uses his
loans as a sign of poverty, the professor believes that they were only necessary because the
Chevalier needed time to sell his property for cash. Likewise, despite the text’s doubts on the
conversation of the Chevalier with Voltaire, the professor states that the Chevalier made
notes during his conversation and in fact was able to write exactly what was said. Even the
Chevalier’s escape can be supported with evidence. There are documents which shows that
the ceiling needed to be repaired after the Chevalier’s escape, and no other powerful
prisoners were able to pay for their freedom.

From above, it can be said that the professor’s claim about the accuracy of the
Chevalier’s book reasonably counters the doubts made in the passage.