Does it sound natural?
[This code is only for my own info: etsFree-w1-21-05-17]
The author of the reading believes that Chevalier distorted his memoir to make it more attractive to the readers. The lecturer's position, however, is that the memoir is accurate and can be counted as a reliable historical source.
According to the author, despite Chevalier's claim, he had not been wealthy. This is because he had got loan from a merchant, and, "Why a wealthy man should borrow money?", the author asks. This point is challenged by the lecturer, who states that when Chevalier lived in Switzerland, he sold his properties to make some money. However, before he did so, he had to borrow some money from a friend untill his properties were converted to money.
Secondly, the reading casts doubt on the accuracy of the Chevalier's conversation with Voltaire, as it is recorded in the memoir. The author mentions that the memoir is written years after the interview, so Chevalier could not remember all the details precisely. However, the lecturer says that Chevalier had written down the conversations right after his visit with Voltaire, and, hence, he was likely to remember the details well. She adds that since the memoir is based on those notes, it is reliable.
Finally, the author contends that Chevalier did not escape from a jail, but he was released by his jailers who were his friends. The lecturer, however, says that Chevalier's jails were soon inspected after he released and its sealings were repaired. It is a compelling proof she says.