The Frauenkirche in Dresden, a historic church destroyed by bombing in

Question

The Frauenkirche in Dresden, a historic church destroyed by bombing in World War II, has been reconstructed to serve as a place for church services and cultural events. The foundation doing the reconstruction took extraordinary care to return the church to its original form. It is a puzzle, then, why the foundation chose not to rebuild the eighteenth-century baroque organ originally designed for the church and instead built a modern organ, even though a donor had offered to pay the full cost of rebuilding the original.

Which one of the following, if true, would most help to resolve the puzzle described above?

(A) An eighteenth-century baroque organ cannot adequately produce much of the organ music now played in church services and concerts.

(B) The organ originally designed for the church had some features that modern organs lack.

(C) The donation for rebuilding the original eighteenth-century baroque organ was designated for that purpose alone.

(D) By the time the church was destroyed in World War II, the eighteenth century baroque organ had been modified several times.

(E) In the eighteenth century, the organ played an important role in church services at the Frauenkirche.

A_Nishith · Answer

(A) An eighteenth-century baroque organ cannot adequately produce much of the organ music now played in church services and concerts.
✅ This provides a practical reason for the decision. If the original baroque organ was not suitable for contemporary church services and concerts, then the foundation may have chosen a modern organ to better serve its current purpose. This explains the seeming inconsistency and helps resolve the puzzle.

(B) The organ originally designed for the church had some features that modern organs lack.
❌ This does not explain why the foundation chose a modern organ. It highlights differences between the two types but does not resolve the puzzle.

(C) The donation for rebuilding the original eighteenth-century baroque organ was designated for that purpose alone.
❌ While this clarifies that the donation was specifically meant for the baroque organ, it does not explain why the foundation still opted for a modern organ.

(D) By the time the church was destroyed in World War II, the eighteenth-century baroque organ had been modified several times.
❌ This indicates that the organ had changed over time, but it does not directly explain why the foundation chose not to rebuild it in its original form.

(E) In the eighteenth century, the organ played an important role in church services at the Frauenkirche.
❌ This is historical context but does not address why the foundation opted for a modern organ.

Correct Answer: (A)

SatvikVedala · Answer

In a Resolve the Paradox Questions, we are not presented with a conclusion
Instead we are presented with 2 contrasting scenarios & we need to link the scenarios
Strategy is to run through the options & eliminate the irrelevant choices

(A) An eighteenth-century baroque organ cannot adequately produce much of the organ music now played in church services and concerts.
 - This option presents the contrast between modern & old organ. Can hold to it as answer. continuing

(B) The organ originally designed for the church had some features that modern organs lack.
 - If original organ lasts some features why would one provide support to re-build, had it been already known. Not resolving the paradox. Eliminated

(C) The donation for rebuilding the original eighteenth-century baroque organ was designated for that purpose alone.
 - Not relevant as it talks about donation

(D) By the time the church was destroyed in World War II, the eighteenth century baroque organ had been modified several times.
- Not relevant as it talks about modifications made

(E) In the eighteenth century, the organ played an important role in church services at the Frauenkirche.
- Not relevant as it talks about relevance

glagad · Answer

In A, What if much of the music can be played through some other means (which can't be played by 18th century organ)??? This could still be the solution for the problem and the original intention of restoring it as it is could be achieved.

In D, the organ has been modified multiple times even before destruction so there is no benchmark to restore it back to.

In my opinion, D provides a  stronger reasoning  for not going back and restoring 18th century organ.

Can someone help me understand what am I missing?

ManifestDreamMBA · Answer

My understanding is it is because they could but chose not to.  
 Note: ....It is a puzzle, then, why the foundation  chose not to  rebuild the eighteenth-century baroque organ....

Let's say the organ when installed had a state A and then alter modifications had a state B. The foundation could have picked state A or B to replicate, but they decided not to because they considered the utility of the organ, which wouldn't match the pre sent day organ music now played in church services and concerts.

Had they mentioned they could not, that would have indicated, they couldn't asses the original state A and might have supported option D. Also for this to be true, the author/choice would have probably mentioned that they were able to restore other things which underwent modifications.

Hope this helps!

The Frauenkirche in Dresden, a historic church destroyed by bombing in

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The Frauenkirche in Dresden, a historic church destroyed by bombing in

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards