Musical Maladies - IELTS Reading Answers & Explanations
From IELTS Recent Actual Test 3 Academic Reading Test 4 · Part 3 · Questions 27–40
Reading Passage
You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 27-40, which are based on Reading Passage 3 below.
Musical Maladies
Norman M. Weinberger reviews the latest work of Oliver Sacks on music.
Music and the brain are both endlessly fascinating subjects, and as a neuroscientist specialising in auditory learning and memory, I find them especially intriguing. So I had high expectations of Musicophilia, the latest offering from neurologist and prolific author Oliver Sacks. And I confess to feeling a little guilty reporting that my reactions to the book are mixed.
Sacks himself is the best part of Musicophilia. He richly documents his own life in the book and reveals highly personal experiences. The photograph of him on the cover of the book—which shows him wearing headphones, eyes closed, clearly enchanted as he listens to Alfred Brendel perform Beethoven's Pathétique Sonata—makes a positive impression that is borne out by the contents of the book. Sacks's voice throughout is steady and erudite but never pontifical. He is neither self-conscious nor self-promoting.
The preface gives a good idea of what the book will deliver. In it Sacks explains that he wants to convey the insights gleaned from the “enormous and rapidly growing body of work on the neural underpinnings of musical perception and imagery, and the complex and often bizarre disorders to which these are prone.” He also stresses the importance of “the simple art of observation” and “the richness of the human context.” He wants to combine “observation and description with the latest in technology,” he says, and to imaginatively enter into the experience of his patients and subjects. The reader can see that Sacks, who has been practicing neurology for 40 years, is torn between the “old-fashioned” path of observation and the new-fangled, high-tech approach: He knows that he needs to take heed of the latter, but his heart lies with the former.
The book consists mainly of detailed descriptions of cases, most of them involving patients whom Sacks has seen in his practice. Brief discussions of contemporary neuroscientific reports are sprinkled liberally throughout the text. Part I, “Haunted by Music,” begins with the strange case of Tony Cicoria, a nonmusical, middle-aged surgeon who was consumed by a love of music after being hit by lightning. He suddenly began to crave listening to piano music, which he had never cared for in the past. He started to play the piano and then to compose music, which arose spontaneously in his mind in a “torrent” of notes. How could this happen? Was the cause psychological? (He had had a near-death experience when the lightning struck him.) Or was it the direct result of a change in the auditory regions of his cerebral cortex? Electro-encephalography (EEG) showed his brain waves to be normal in the mid-1990s, just after his trauma and subsequent “conversion” to music. There are now more sensitive tests, but Cicoria has declined to undergo them; he does not want to delve into the causes of his musicality. What a shame!
Part II, “A Range of Musicality,” covers a wider variety of topics, but unfortunately, some of the chapters offer little or nothing that is new. For example, chapter 13, which is five pages long, merely notes that the blind often have better hearing than the sighted. The most interesting chapters are those that present the strangest cases. Chapter 8 is about “amusia,” an inability to hear sounds as music, and “dysharmonia,” a highly specific impairment of the ability to hear harmony, with the ability to understand melody left intact. Such specific “dissociations” are found throughout the cases Sacks recounts.
To Sacks's credit, part III, “Memory, Movement and Music,” brings us into the underappreciated realm of music therapy. Chapter 16 explains how “melodic intonation therapy” is being used to help expressive aphasic patients (those unable to express their thoughts verbally following a stroke or other cerebral incident) once again become capable of fluent speech. In chapter 20, Sacks demonstrates the near-miraculous power of music to animate Parkinson's patients and other people with severe movement disorders, even those who are frozen into odd postures. Scientists cannot yet explain how music achieves this effect.
To readers who are unfamiliar with neuroscience and music behavior, Musicophilia may be something of a revelation. But the book will not satisfy those seeking the causes and implications of the phenomena Sacks describes. For one thing, Sacks appears to be more at ease discussing patients than discussing experiments. And he tends to be rather uncritical in accepting scientific findings and theories.
It's true that the causes of music-brain oddities remain poorly understood. However, Sacks could have done more to draw out some of the implications of the careful observations that he and other neurologists have made and of the treatments that have been successful. For example, he might have noted that the many specific dissociations among components of music comprehension, such as loss of the ability to perceive harmony but not melody, indicate that there is no music center in the brain. Because many people who read the book are likely to believe in the brain localisation of all mental functions, this was a missed educational opportunity.
Another conclusion one could draw is that there seem to be no “cures” for neurological problems involving music. A drug can alleviate a symptom in one patient and aggravate it in another, or can have both positive and negative effects in the same patient. Treatments mentioned seem to be almost exclusively antiepileptic medications, which “damp down” the excitability of the brain in general; their effectiveness varies widely.
Finally, in many of the cases described here the patient with music-brain symptoms is reported to have “normal” EEG results. Although Sacks recognises the existence of new technologies, among them far more sensitive ways to analyze brain waves than the standard neurological EEG test, he does not call for their use. In fact, although he exhibits the greatest compassion for patients, he conveys no sense of urgency about the pursuit of new avenues in the diagnosis and treatment of music-brain disorders. This absence echoes the book's preface, in which Sacks expresses fear that “the simple art of observation may be lost” if we rely too much on new technologies. He does call for both approaches, though, and we can only hope that the neurological community will respond.
Questions
Questions 27–30 Multiple Choice (One Answer)
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.
Questions 31–36 Yes / No / Not Given
Do the following statements agree with the views of the writer in Reading Passage 3?
Write
YES if the statement agrees with the views of the writer
NO if the statement contradicts with the views of the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
Questions 37–40 Matching Sentence Endings
Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-F, below.
A. show no music-brain disorders.
B. indicates that medication can have varied results.
C. is key for the neurological community to unravel the mysteries.
D. should not be used in isolation.
E. indicate that not everyone can receive good education.
F. show that music is not localised in the brain.
Answers & Explanations Summary
| # | Answer | Evidence | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q27 | B | So I had high expectations of Musicophilia, the latest offering from neurologist and prolific author Oliver Sacks. And I confess to feeling a little guilty reporting that my reactions to the book are mixed | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says the writer expected the book to be great ('high expectations'). But, he feels his thoughts and feelings ('reactions') about the book are 'mixed,' which means he has both good and bad opinions about it. This tells us the book was not as good as he had wished for. Answer Explanation: The answer means that the writer thought the book would be very good, but it was not as good as he had hoped. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is B because the writer states in the first paragraph that he had 'high expectations' for the book. However, he then says that his 'reactions to the book are mixed'. This contrast shows that the book did not fully meet his high hopes, meaning it wasn't as good as he expected it to be. The review later points out both good and bad things about the book, supporting this mixed feeling. |
| Q28 | C | Sacks himself is the best part of Musicophilia. He richly documents his own life in the book and reveals highly personal experiences | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that the author of the book, Sacks, is the most enjoyable part of it. This is because he writes in detail about his own life and shares very personal stories. Answer Explanation: The answer means that the best part of the book is the stories the author, Oliver Sacks, tells about his own life. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is 'the autobiographical description in the book' because the passage says that 'Sacks himself is the best part of Musicophilia.' It then explains that he 'documents his own life in the book and reveals highly personal experiences.' The phrase 'documents his own life' is another way of saying 'autobiographical description', which means writing about your own life. |
| Q29 | A | The reader can see that Sacks, who has been practicing neurology for 40 years, is torn between the “old-fashioned” path of observation and the new-fangled, high-tech approach: He knows that he needs to take heed of the latter, but his heart lies with the former | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that Sacks, an experienced doctor, feels a conflict. He likes the old way of watching his patients, but he knows he must also use the new, modern technology, even though he does not like it as much. Answer Explanation: The answer means Sacks is trying to accept and use new technologies in his work, even if he prefers older methods. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is A because the passage says Sacks feels divided between his old method of simply observing patients and the new, modern technical approach. The passage states he 'is torn between the “old-fashioned” path of observation and the new-fangled, high-tech approach'. It also says he knows he 'needs to take heed of the latter', which means he must pay attention to new technology. This struggle to accept and use new tools is what 'make terms with the new technologies' means. |
| Q30 | A | There are now more sensitive tests, but Cicoria has declined to undergo them; he does not want to delve into the causes of his musicality. What a shame | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that there are new, better tests available to study Tony Cicoria's brain. However, he has refused to do them because he does not want to investigate the reasons for his musical talent. The writer thinks this is very disappointing. Answer Explanation: The answer means the disappointing thing about Tony Cicoria is that he said 'no' to having more medical tests. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is 'He refuses to have further tests' because the passage describes Tony Cicoria's case and the mystery of his sudden musical talent after being struck by lightning. The author mentions that there are 'more sensitive tests' that could help understand his condition. However, the text states that 'Cicoria has declined to undergo them'. The word 'declined' means refused. The author shows their disappointment by writing 'What a shame!', directly linking the disappointment to Cicoria's refusal to have more tests. |
| Q31 | YES | And I confess to feeling a little guilty reporting that my reactions to the book are mixed | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that the writer admits ('confess') that he feels a little bad ('guilty') about telling people that his thoughts ('reactions') on the book are 'mixed', which means partly good and partly bad. Answer Explanation: The answer is YES. This means the writer of the review agrees that it is hard to give a famous writer a review that is not completely good. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is YES because the writer, Norman M. Weinberger, says he feels 'a little guilty' about giving a 'mixed' review of the book. The word 'guilty' shows that it was difficult for him to write a review that was not entirely positive for a well-known author like Oliver Sacks. |
| Q32 | NOT GIVEN | The photograph of him on the cover of the book—which shows him wearing headphones, eyes closed, clearly enchanted as he listens to Alfred Brendel perform Beethoven's Pathétique Sonata—makes a positive impression that is borne out by the contents of the book | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says there is a picture of the book's author, Oliver Sacks, on the cover. In the picture, he is enjoying listening to Beethoven's Pathétique Sonata. This shows he likes the music, but it does not say the music is a medical treatment. Answer Explanation: The answer means that the passage does not say whether Beethoven's Pathétique Sonata is a good way to help people with music-related problems. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is NOT GIVEN because the passage mentions Beethoven's Pathétique Sonata only once, when describing the book cover. It says that the author of the book, Oliver Sacks, is shown listening to this music and looks very happy. The passage does not say anything about this specific music being used as a 'treatment' for 'musical disorders'. The writer of the review does not give an opinion on this subject. |
| Q33 | NO | The reader can see that Sacks, who has been practicing neurology for 40 years, is torn between the 'old-fashioned' path of observation and the new-fangled, high-tech approach: He knows that he needs to take heed of the latter, but his heart lies with the former | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that Sacks feels caught between two methods: the old way of watching patients ('observation') and the new way using technology ('high-tech approach'). It explains that he knows he must pay attention to technology, even if he prefers the old way of observation. Answer Explanation: The answer is NO. This means the statement that Sacks believes technology is not as important as observation is incorrect. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is NO. The passage shows that Sacks believes both observation and technology are important. The author states that Sacks is 'torn between' the two methods. While Sacks may personally prefer observation, he knows he needs to use modern technology and wants to 'combine' both approaches in his work. This means he does not think technology is unimportant. |
| Q34 | NOT GIVEN | To Sacks's credit, part III, “Memory, Movement and Music,” brings us into the underappreciated realm of music therapy | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that one part of the book introduces the topic of music therapy, which the writer calls an 'underappreciated realm.' This means that its value is not fully recognized. However, the passage does not explain why this is the case. Answer Explanation: The answer means that the passage does not say whether the writer believes it is hard to know why music therapy is not valued enough. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is NOT GIVEN because while the writer mentions that music therapy is 'underappreciated,' which means undervalued, the passage does not provide any information about the reasons for this. The writer does not say if it is easy or difficult to understand why music therapy is not valued as much as it should be. |
| Q35 | YES | And he tends to be rather uncritical in accepting scientific findings and theories | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that Oliver Sacks often accepts scientific ideas and discoveries from others without questioning them very much. To be 'uncritical' means to believe things too easily, without careful thought or doubt. Answer Explanation: The answer 'YES' means the writer of the passage agrees with the statement. The writer thinks that the book's author, Oliver Sacks, should question other scientific ideas and discoveries more. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is 'YES' because the reviewer criticizes Sacks for not being skeptical enough. The passage mentions that Sacks 'tends to be rather uncritical in accepting scientific findings and theories'. The word 'uncritical' means accepting things without questioning them. This directly matches the idea in the question that Sacks should have more skepticism. |
| Q36 | NO | he conveys no sense of urgency about the pursuit of new avenues in the diagnosis and treatment of music-brain disorders. This absence echoes the book's preface, in which Sacks expresses fear that “the simple art of observation may be lost” if we rely too much on new technologies | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that Sacks does not seem to be in a hurry ('no sense of urgency') to find and use new ways ('new avenues') to diagnose and treat illnesses. This is because he is worried ('expresses fear') that if people use new machines ('new technologies') too much, the important skill of carefully watching patients ('the simple art of observation') might be forgotten ('may be lost'). Answer Explanation: The answer is NO. This means the writer of the review believes that Oliver Sacks is not eager or in a hurry to use new testing methods. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is NO because the reviewer states that Sacks is not enthusiastic about new technology. The passage mentions that Sacks's "heart lies with" the "old-fashioned" method of observation. Most importantly, the reviewer says Sacks shows "no sense of urgency" to use new methods for diagnosis and treatment because he is afraid that the "simple art of observation may be lost". Showing 'no urgency' is the opposite of being 'impatient'. |
| Q37 | F | For example, he might have noted that the many specific dissociations among components of music comprehension, such as loss of the ability to perceive harmony but not melody, indicate that there is no music center in the brain | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that when a person can't understand one part of music (like harmony) but can understand another part (like melody), it proves there is no single 'music center' in the brain. Answer Explanation: The answer means that because some people can lose the ability to understand harmony but still understand melody, it shows that music is not controlled by just one specific part of the brain. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is F because the passage explicitly states that 'specific dissociations,' such as being able to understand melody but not harmony, 'indicate that there is no music center in the brain.' This is another way of saying that music is not 'localised' in one specific area. |
| Q38 | B | A drug can alleviate a symptom in one patient and aggravate it in another, or can have both positive and negative effects in the same patient | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that a medicine can make a problem better for one person ('alleviate a symptom') but make it worse for someone else ('aggravate it'). It also explains that the medicine can have both good ('positive') and bad ('negative') effects on the same person. Answer Explanation: The answer means that using medicine to treat brain problems related to music can have very different outcomes for different people. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is B because the passage explains that treatments for music-related neurological issues are not always the same for everyone. The text states that a 'drug' can help one person ('alleviate a symptom') but make things worse for another person ('aggravate it'). It also says that medicine can have both good and bad effects on the same patient, and its 'effectiveness varies widely'. This shows that medication has 'varied results'. |
| Q39 | A | Finally, in many of the cases described here the patient with music-brain symptoms is reported to have ‘normal’ EEG results | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that in many of the stories about patients with brain problems related to music, the results from their EEG tests were considered 'normal'. Answer Explanation: The answer means that the brain scans (EEGs) of Sacks's patients often looked normal and did not show anything wrong, even when the patients had problems related to music. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is A because the passage clearly states that for many of the patients with music-related brain issues, their EEG tests showed 'normal' results. This means the scans did not detect or show the brain disorders, even though the patients had them. |
| Q40 | D | He wants to combine “observation and description with the latest in technology,” he says, and to imaginatively enter into the experience of his patients and subjects | Excerpt/Passage Explanation: The passage says that Sacks wants to mix the old way of studying patients, which is watching and describing them, with new, modern technology. This means he believes both methods are important and should be used together. Answer Explanation: The answer means that Sacks thinks new methods of testing, using modern technology, should not be used by themselves. They should be used along with other, more traditional methods. Reason For Correctness: The correct answer is supported by the passage which explains Sacks's view on modern and traditional approaches to neurology. The text states that Sacks wants to "combine" the old method of "observation" with "the latest in technology". It also mentions he is "torn between" the two and later that he "does call for both approaches". This shows he believes the two methods should be used together, meaning new technologies should not be used in isolation or alone. |
