The Reframing of a Disputed Cultural Legacy
About this practice test
A critical reading about how Larkhaven reframes a disputed monument through archival evidence, competing public responses, and a museum exhibition that questions simplified civic memory.
What you’ll practice
Finding detail
Locate specific information and evidence.
Interpreting ideas
Connect main points and inferences.
Evaluating arguments
Assess claims, evidence, and limitations.
What to expect:
2 questions with explanations to review after submission.
Study the questions and tasks
Work through the material below, or start the interactive practice above to complete an attempt. Try the exercises before opening any answer or transcript sections, then use them to review your work.
- Practice level
- C2. Try this level if you can follow the instructions and understand most of the language; choose an earlier level if you need more support.
- Question formats
- Cloze (dropdown)
How to approach this practice
Read the passage for its main idea, then return to the relevant sentence or paragraph for each question. Base answers on the passage.
The Reframing of a Disputed Cultural Legacy
When the city of Larkhaven began to argue again about the marble statue outside the old library, the dispute was never really about stone. Elias Vale had once been praised as a benefactor, a poet, a patron of schools, and the man whose donation had paid for the library steps. Yet the same archives that recorded his gifts also recorded his shares in a sugar plantation worked by enslaved people. For years the statue had been treated as civic furniture, something people passed without quite reading. Then a group of teachers asked for a public explanation, and a more difficult question surfaced: what should a city do with a legacy that had already been simplified for generations? Mara Ilyas, the museum curator asked to design the display, refused the usual reflexes. She said the problem was not whether Vale was "good" or "bad" but how public memory chooses one trait to carry the rest. She disliked the language of being "cancelled", because it implies that damage begins only when a statue is removed. In her view, the damage often begins much earlier, when schoolbooks trim away the awkward parts in order to keep a clean story. If a community is taught to admire an emblem without asking how the emblem was made possible, then the forgetting has already done its work. The archive gave her more than slogans. There were letters, account books, a travel diary, and a donation ledger. They showed that Vale funded an orphan hospital and supported coastal charting, but also invested heavily in plantation expansion after the sugar market rose. Mara did not present this as a moral balance sheet, as though good deeds could be weighed neatly against harm. Instead she argued that civic life had made it easy to separate where money came from from what it built. The statue on the steps was not simply the image of a philanthropist; it was evidence that public gratitude can survive by ignoring the wider social cost. So she rejected both a blank wall and a triumphant plaque. The display she proposed had three rooms. The first kept the statue, the speeches, and the old newspaper clippings that praised Vale in his lifetime. The second followed the trade routes, the auction notices, and the ledgers that tied those charitable donations to profits extracted elsewhere. The third gathered oral histories from descendants of dockworkers, teachers, and families who had long lived with the monument in their daily routines. Mara wanted visitors to move from familiarity to unease, and then from unease to judgment that could not close too quickly. The trustees worried that such an exhibition would assign inherited guilt to people who had never owned a share in anything except a rented flat. Mara answered that the display did not punish the present; it asked what gets protected when a city celebrates benefit without its source. She said that removal alone can be comforting, because absence lets people imagine the problem has been solved. Keeping the statue untouched can also be a form of comfort, because it preserves forgetting. In her view, a difficult legacy needed to stay visible long enough for the public to notice what its own habits had hidden. During the workshops, younger visitors wanted direct condemnation, while some older residents feared that scrutiny would become humiliation. Mara listened to both. She changed labels that sounded defensive, and she added a line describing Vale as a contested benefactor rather than a saint or a monster. One retired dockworker told her that he could live with a harsher label if the exhibition also explained why his schoolyard had once sat on donated land. That remark mattered to Mara, because it showed that people were not asking for innocence; they were asking for honesty with enough context to be bearable. When the exhibition opened, the reaction was mixed, which was probably the most honest sign that it had worked. Some visitors were angry to find plantation records beside poems and portraits. Others said they felt unexpectedly relieved that the city had not reduced Vale to a villain. The shift Mara wanted did begin to happen: the debate moved away from whether the statue should stay and toward what work the statue does in the city. It was no longer merely an object to defend or remove. It had become a question about what a public chooses to remember in order to describe itself. Still, Mara insisted that the display was not a cure for history. Without follow-up, context can become another polite way of avoiding change. A city may learn the correct language and still leave its institutions untouched. For that reason she would have accepted relocation of the statue if the move were explained openly, rather than disguised as tidiness. What she resisted was the fantasy that a carefully worded caption could provide moral repair alone. A caption can narrow ignorance, but it cannot by itself alter who speaks, who decides, or who benefits from the old arrangement. After six months, the council reached a compromise. The statue remained, but only after the base received a ground-level plaque and a recorded trail of commentary that visitors could hear on their phones. Predictably, some critics called the decision timid; others called it mature. Mara thought both reactions had a point. The compromise did not resolve the argument, and perhaps that was the most useful outcome. A legacy stays disputed precisely when a community stops pretending that discomfort is a nuisance rather than evidence. The quarrel itself became proof that the city had finally begun to notice the unresolved inheritance it had spent so long admiring. In the end, the lesson of Larkhaven was not that every monument must fall or that every monument can be saved by explanation. It was that a disputed legacy cannot be made clean, only legible. The point of reframing is neither to rescue the dead from criticism nor to perform outrage for its own sake. It is to create a public space in which admiration does not depend on amnesia, and in which a city can remember its benefits without pretending that their price was ever someone else’s problem.
-
Question 1 · Cloze (dropdown)
Choose the correct option for each blank.
Complete the summary below. Choose ONE option for each gap. Mara argues that the dispute is less about whether Elias Vale was 1___ than about how public memory turns a person into a single trait. The archive shows that the city long let visitors separate charitable results from 2___. She therefore rejects both a 3___ and a celebratory label, arranging the material so that visitors move from familiarity to unease and can see the 4___ of civic generosity. She also refuses the idea that present-day residents should carry 5___, and she says a city should ask what it protects when it celebrates benefit without its 6___.
Return to the passage, recording or visualChoices for blank 1
- rich or poor
- legal or illegal
- famous or unknown
- good or bad
Choices for blank 2
- how the statue looked
- who first signed it
- when the archive opened
- where the money came from
Choices for blank 3
- silver frame
- blank wall
- new archive
- bronze plaque
Choices for blank 4
- shape
- history
- price
- scale
Choices for blank 5
- public applause
- local pride
- inherited guilt
- personal blame
Choices for blank 6
- evidence
- value
- source
- distance
Check answers and explanations
- Blank 1
- good or bad
- Blank 2
- where the money came from
- Blank 3
- blank wall
- Blank 4
- price
- Blank 5
- inherited guilt
- Blank 6
- source
Gap 1: “good or bad” fits Mara’s rejection of a simple moral verdict on Vale. The source says the problem was not whether Vale was “good” or “bad” but how memory selects one trait. Gap 2: “where the money came from” fits the source’s contrast between charitable results and their financial origins. Civic life separated where the money came from from what it built. Gap 3: “blank wall” is one of the two approaches Mara rejects. She refuses both a blank wall and a triumphant plaque. Gap 4: “price” captures the social cost connected to civic generosity. The source says the display should reveal the wider social cost behind public gratitude. Gap 5: “inherited guilt” matches the trustees’ concern that the exhibition might assign inherited guilt to people who had never owned a share. Gap 6: “source” completes Mara’s question about celebrating benefit without its source. The source presents this as the central problem in separating results from origins.
the problem was not whether Vale was "good" or "bad" but how public memory chooses one trait to carry the rest
civic life had made it easy to separate where money came from from what it built
She said that removal alone can be comforting, because absence lets people imagine the problem has been solved
-
Question 2 · Cloze (dropdown)
Choose the correct option for each blank.
Complete the summary below. Choose ONE option for each gap. At the public workshops, younger visitors wanted 1___, while some older residents feared that scrutiny would become humiliation. Mara adjusted the labels and described Vale as a 2___. A retired dockworker said he could accept a harsher label if the exhibition also explained why his schoolyard had once sat on donated land. When the show opened, reactions were mixed: some people resented the plantation records, but others were relieved that the city had not reduced Vale to a villain. The debate then shifted from whether the statue should remain to what work it 3___. Mara also insisted that the exhibition was not a cure for history, because without wider action even careful context can become a polite way of avoiding 4___. She would accept relocation if it were explained publicly, but she rejected the fantasy that a caption alone could provide 5___. In the end, the council chose a compromise, and the controversy stayed alive as evidence that the city had finally begun to notice its 6___.
Return to the passage, recording or visualChoices for blank 1
- tourist guide
- quiet approval
- direct condemnation
- legal protection
Choices for blank 2
- local tradition
- contested benefactor
- new monument
- hidden treasure
Choices for blank 3
- replaces
- records
- does
- ignores
Choices for blank 4
- compromise
- change
- blame
- pride
Choices for blank 5
- local pride
- moral repair
- historical proof
- public anger
Choices for blank 6
- official consensus
- unresolved inheritance
- personal memory
- tourist interest
Check answers and explanations
- Blank 1
- direct condemnation
- Blank 2
- contested benefactor
- Blank 3
- does
- Blank 4
- change
- Blank 5
- moral repair
- Blank 6
- unresolved inheritance
Gap 1: “direct condemnation” matches what younger visitors wanted during the workshops. Older residents, by contrast, feared that scrutiny would become humiliation. Gap 2: “contested benefactor” is the label Mara added. It avoids presenting Vale either as a saint or as a monster. Gap 3: “does” fits the shift in the debate toward what work the statue does in the city. The statue becomes a question about public memory rather than merely an object to defend or remove. Gap 4: “change” matches Mara’s warning that context can become a polite way of avoiding change without follow-up. Gap 5: “moral repair” is the repair a carefully worded caption cannot provide by itself. The source says a caption can narrow ignorance but cannot alter who speaks, decides, or benefits. Gap 6: “unresolved inheritance” matches the final description of what the city had begun to notice. The compromise did not resolve the argument; it made the inheritance visible.
younger visitors wanted direct condemnation, while some older residents feared that scrutiny would become humiliation
and she added a line describing Vale as a contested benefactor rather than a saint or a monster
Without follow-up, context can become another polite way of avoiding change
What to review next
Find the words that support each answer. For a mistake, compare the question with the evidence and identify the detail or inference you missed.
A focused practice result shows how you did on these tasks. Use several activities across skills to decide what to study next; one practice score does not certify an overall CEFR level.
Before you practise: a worked example
Look for evidence in the text. Separate what the writer says from what you already know about the topic.
The library normally closes at six, but on Fridays it stays open until eight. When does it close on Friday?
The answer is eight. But introduces an exception to the normal closing time, so the first time mentioned is not the answer.
This teaching example is separate from the scored questions. After your test, compare any mistakes with the explanation and revisit the topic before trying again.