Chopin the pianist has been greatly overshadowed by Chopin the composer. When Chopin the pianist is mentioned, it is his dreamy gaze and supple wrists (as well as countless female admirers gathered around the piano returning that same dreamy stare). But Chopin was a formidable pianist in his own right: after all, he was able to play, from start to finish, all twenty-four of his etudes, a set of pieces so demanding that even today's great pianists feel taxed after performing them. Two things perhaps account for this oversight: for one, any pianist for whom no extant recordings exist is likely not to weather time well. Secondly, Chopin's coeval and friend, Franz Liszt, was of such legendary prowess that Chopin himself wished he could play his own etudes the way Liszt did. Nevertheless, Chopin deserves to be remembered not just as a composer of challenging pieces but as a pianist capable of executing, with panache, these very pieces.
1. Which of the following, if true, would cast the most doubt on the author's contention regarding Chopin the pianist?
A. Chopin rarely, if ever, played the piano works of other composers.
B. Apart from a cello concerto and a few other works, Chopin composed mainly for the piano.
C. Chopin seldom performed his etudes in concerts, preferring to play in front of a small group.
D. Not all of Chopin's compositions are as difficult to execute as his etudes.
E. Chopin, himself, acknowledged that he was primarily a composer, and would have composed even more difficult pieces had he the ability to play them.
Answer: (E)
Only (E) directly casts doubt on Chopin's playing ability, "more difficult pieces�had he the ability to play them."
Even if Chopin never played other composer's works, it isn't necessarily because those works were too difficult. We need something stronger than (A).
The issue is Chopin's piano playing ability. So that he could or could not play other instruments is unimportant. (B) is out.
(C) does not relate to issue. Even if his etudes were Chopin's most difficult pieces that doesn't diminish his piano playing prowess.
2. In the context in which it appears, "weather" most nearly means
A. perish
B. subsist
C. withstand
D. transform
E. sustain
Answer: (C)
In context, we learn that players with extant recordings (work still in existence) seem to 'weather' time better than those who do not have extant recordings.
(C), which means to hold up/endure, works best.
(B) means to barely survive, a meaning that does not quite fit the context.
(E) has a few meanings. One meaning is something like "suffer through," which makes this tempting. We sustain blows, injuries, or other painful things. It doesn't mean we survive them, we just get them. In this sentence, we need something that means suffer through, but not be defeated by--and that's "withstand."
Besides that, we can get a sense that "sustain time" doesn't work just by ear; it's not a normal English collocation. "Withstand time" is much more natural.
