Reviewer Allison Shester works through Jason Barr's book on Manhattan chapter by chapter: an engaging aerial and underground tour of 1609 New York, solid chapters on the grid and land use, immigrant neighbourhoods, three kinds of skyscraper height, the 'bedrock myth', the 1920s boom, and impressive land-value data. Her criticisms: one gap in the tenement argument, and some chapters too technical for general readers.
The multiple choice (27-31) follows the review from start to finish. YES / NO / NOT GIVEN (32-35) covers the chapter one to four paragraphs. The summary (36-40) is the chapter seven paragraph on bedrock.
Multiple choice
Questions 27-31
How to attack this block: Each question asks about Shester's evaluation. The book combines geology, history, economics and data (a range of factors). The tenement point is a possible weakness in Barr's argument. Chapter six is more technical than general readers would like, and chapter eight's theory may distract some readers. The land-value data work is what impresses her most.
Question 27
Answer: DParagraph 1, second sentence
What does Shester say about the book in the first paragraph?
The book combines geology, history, economics, and a lot of data to explain why business clusters developed where they did
Question says → Passage says
a range of factorsgeology, history, economics, and a lot of data
the development of New Yorkwhy business clusters developed where they did / shaped the skyline
Why: Geology, history, economics and data are several different angles on why New York grew the way it did. That's a range of factors, so D.
The trap: B is the trap. Barr's research papers only feed into 'the latter chapters', the second part, not the whole book. A is wrong too: Shester never calls the explanation original.
Question 28
Answer: BParagraph 3, second half
How does Shester react to what the book says about tenements?
Shester would have liked Barr to expand upon his claim that existing tenements prevented skyscrapers… At first glance, it is not obvious why slum clearance would be limiting, while more expensive foundations would not.
Question says → Passage says
a potential problem with Barr's analysisit is not obvious why slum clearance would be limiting, while more expensive foundations would not
Why: Shester points out that Barr's two claims seem to clash: slum clearance stopped developers, but more expensive deep foundations didn't. She wants this explained, which flags a possible weakness. B.
The trap: C tempts because she compares two claims, but both are Barr's own. No other writers are mentioned.
Question 29
Answer: CParagraph 6, last sentence
What does Shester say about chapter six?
While less technical than the research paper on which the chapter is based, it is probably more technical than would be preferred by a general audience.
Question says → Passage says
too specialisedmore technical than would be preferred
most readersa general audience
Why: 'More technical than a general audience would prefer' means it's too specialised for most readers. C.
The trap: D tempts because the chapter is based on a research paper, but nothing says that research is out of date. The comparison with the paper is only about how technical it is.
Question 30
Answer: DParagraph 8, second sentence
What does Shester suggest about the chapters on the 1920s boom?
Chapter eight contains lengthy discussions of urban economic theory that may serve as a distraction to readers primarily interested in New York.
Question says → Passage says
limited appeal to certain peoplemay serve as a distraction to readers primarily interested in New York
Some partslengthy discussions of urban economic theory
Why: The theory sections may distract readers who mainly care about New York, though students of urban economics would like them. Some parts appeal to some readers and not others. D.
The trap: C tempts because Barr says cheap credit wasn't the main cause of the boom. That's Barr rejecting an explanation, not Shester saying his explanation is unlikely. B is out because financing is already discussed.
Question 31
Answer: CLast paragraph, second sentence
What impresses Shester most in the land-values chapter?
The data work that went into these estimations is particularly impressive.
Question says → Passage says
impressesparticularly impressive
the nature of the research into the topicThe data work that went into these estimations
Why: 'Particularly impressive' is the strongest praise in the paragraph, and it's for the data work behind the estimates. That's the research, so C.
The trap: A tempts because the estimates run from the mid-19th century to the present, a long period. That's what is covered, not what she praises. The policy suggestions (D) come in the epilogue, with no comment from her.
YES / NO / NOT GIVEN
Questions 32-35
How to attack this block: The helicopter tour is called 'fascinating' (so the first statement is NO), and chapters two and three 'set the stage' (YES). The immigrant enclaves sat between the waterfront industries and Central Park, not around the harbour (NO). Nothing says a lack of amenities was their biggest problem.
Question 32
Answer: NOParagraph 2, first sentence
Is the first chapter's view of New York from the air in 1609 boring?
giving a fascinating account of how the New York landscape in 1609 might have looked from the sky
Question says → Passage says
lacks interestfascinating
how New York probably looked from the airhow the New York landscape in 1609 might have looked from the sky
Why: 'Fascinating' is the opposite of lacking interest, so the writer's view contradicts the statement. NO.
Question 33
Answer: YESParagraph 3, fourth sentence
Do chapters two and three prepare readers well for what comes later?
Both chapters are informative and well researched and set the stage for the economic analysis that comes later in the book.
Question says → Passage says
prepare the reader wellset the stage for
material yet to comethe economic analysis that comes later in the book
Why: 'Set the stage for' means prepare for, and 'informative and well researched' tells you it's done well. YES.
The trap: The next sentence starts a criticism (the tenements point), which can make you think the chapters are being judged negatively. That criticism is about one claim, not about how well they prepare the reader.
Question 34
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph 4, second sentence
Was a lack of amenities the biggest problem for 19th-century immigrant neighbourhoods?
Barr identifies four primary immigrant enclaves and analyzes their locations in terms of the amenities available in the area.
Question says → Passage says
immigrant neighbourhoodsimmigrant enclaves
amenitiesthe amenities available in the area
Why: Amenities are mentioned, but only as a way Barr analyses where the enclaves were. Nothing says which problem was biggest, or that amenities were lacking. NOT GIVEN.
The trap: 'Least valuable land' in the next sentence makes it sound like the neighbourhoods were poor and short of everything. Still, no 'biggest problem' is ever named.
Question 35
Answer: NOParagraph 4, last sentence
Did the immigrant neighbourhoods cluster around the harbour?
Most of these enclaves were located on the least valuable land, between the industries located on the waterfront and the wealthy neighborhoods bordering Central Park.
Question says → Passage says
tended to concentrateMost of these enclaves were located
around the harbourbetween the industries located on the waterfront and the wealthy neighborhoods
Why: The enclaves sat between the waterfront industries and Central Park, so away from the water, not around it. That contradicts the statement: NO.
The trap: 'Waterfront' looks like 'harbour' and pulls you to YES. Read the preposition: they were between the waterfront and the park, not on the waterfront.
Summary completion (phrase list A-J)
Questions 36-40
How to attack this block: Barr says deeper bedrock doesn't explain why skyscrapers are missing from specific areas. Foundation costs weren't an excessive expense next to the total expenditure of building. Caissons make deep excavations possible, and Barr also covers their associated risks.
Question 36
Answer: HParagraph 7, first sentence
Where does the lack of shallow bedrock fail to explain the absence of skyscrapers?
the assumption that the absence of bedrock close to the surface between Downtown and Midtown New York is the reason for skyscrapers not being built between the two urban centers
Question says → Passage says
why skyscrapers are absent fromthe reason for skyscrapers not being built
specific areasbetween Downtown and Midtown New York
Why: The myth is about one particular zone, the area between Downtown and Midtown. A particular zone is a specific area, so H, specific areas.
The trap: C (great distance) tempts because bedrock is deep, but the gap is about where skyscrapers are missing, not how far down the rock is.
Question 37
Answer: DParagraph 7, second sentence
What can the extra foundation cost not be seen as?
while deeper bedrock does increase foundation costs, these costs were neither prohibitively high nor were they large compared to the overall cost of building a skyscraper
Question says → Passage says
although the cost of foundations increaseswhile deeper bedrock does increase foundation costs
cannot be regarded as excessive expenseneither prohibitively high
Why: 'Prohibitively high' means so expensive it stops you. Barr says the costs weren't, so they can't be regarded as an excessive expense. D.
The trap: I (total expenditure) is also about cost, but it belongs in the next gap, after 'compared to'. You need the idea of 'too much' here.
Question 38
Answer: IParagraph 7, second sentence
What are foundation costs small next to?
nor were they large compared to the overall cost of building a skyscraper
Question says → Passage says
especially when compared tolarge compared to
total expenditurethe overall cost of building a skyscraper
Why: 'Overall cost' = 'total expenditure'. Foundations are a small part of the whole bill, so I.
The trap: A (development plans) can sound like 'the whole project', but plans aren't a cost. The comparison is money against money.
Question 39
Answer: BParagraph 7, middle
What do caissons make possible?
He describes the use of caissons, which enable workers to dig down for considerable distances, often below the water table, until they reach bedrock.
Question says → Passage says
are made possible by the use of caissonsthe use of caissons, which enable workers
deep excavationsdig down for considerable distances
Why: 'Dig down for considerable distances' means digging deep, which is a deep excavation. 'Made possible' = 'enable'. B.
The trap: C (great distance) and G (water level) both echo words in the sentence ('considerable distances', 'water table'), but neither is something that gets 'made'. E (impossible tasks) twists the sense.
Question 40
Answer: FParagraph 7, near the end
What else about caissons does Barr discuss?
Barr's thorough technological history discusses not only how caissons work, but also the dangers involved.
Question says → Passage says
not only how… but he also discusses theirnot only how caissons work, but also
associated risksthe dangers involved
Why: The summary copies the passage's 'not only… but also' frame. 'The dangers involved' = associated risks, so F.
The trap: J (construction guidelines) sounds technical enough to fit a history of how caissons work, but the passage says dangers, not rules.
B. Barr says slum clearance blocked skyscrapers but deep foundations didn't, even though foundations cost more. Shester points out that this doesn't add up.
NO. Most enclaves sat between the waterfront industries and the wealthy areas near Central Park, which isn't the same as clustering around the harbour.
F (associated risks). Barr discusses 'the dangers involved' in caisson work. 'Impossible tasks' is a trap built on 'considerable distances'.
Words from this passage worth keeping
clusters(Paragraph 1)
groups of similar things close together
subterranean(Paragraph 2)
underground
enclaves(Paragraph 4)
areas where a particular group lives together
load-bearing(Paragraph 6)
supporting the weight of a building
prohibitively(Paragraph 7)
so much that it stops people doing something
empirical(Paragraph 7)
based on observation and data
exuberance(Paragraph 8)
great excitement and confidence
viability(Paragraph 8)
whether something can work or be true
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 17 Test 3 reading paper: all three passages, 60 minutes, marked the second you finish with a review of every answer. Already done it? Take it again and see if the same traps still get you.
Cambridge IELTS 17, Test 3, Reading Passage 3. The passage and questions belong to Cambridge University Press and are not reproduced here. We quote short extracts only as evidence for our own commentary, and the answers are published for self-marking. Get the book for the full text, or sit the test on Langujet.
