P1

List of Headings
i. The power within each studio
ii. The movie industry adapts to innovation
iii. Contrasts between cinema and other media of the time
iv. The value of studying Hollywood’s Golden Age
v. Distinguishing themselves from the rest of the market
vi. A double attack on film studios’ power
vii. Gaining control of the industry
viii. The top movies of Hollywood’s Golden Age
14. Paragraph A
15. Paragraph B
16. Paragraph C
17. Paragraph D
18. Paragraph E
19. Paragraph F

T,F,NG

46. Following the success of The Jazz Singer, other studios immediately began producing films with
synchronized sound.

47. In the early 1930s, there were certain difficulties recording movie actors' voices.

48. There was fierce competition between actors, who wanted to sign contracts with the major studios.

49. Studios had complete influence over how the public viewed their actors.

Questions 50-54

Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-G, below.

Write the correct letter, A-E, in boxes 50-54 on your answer sheet.

50. Throughout the Golden Age, the Hollywood movie industry

51. In the late 1920s, studios

52. Using the vertical integration system, the biggest studios

53. For decades, movie moguls

54. In 1948, leading studios

A. Was controlled by a handful of studios

B. Came to an end, when they were forced to open the market to smaller owners

C. Were reluctant to invest in new equipment

D. Handled movies' distribution and showed them in their own theaters

E. Remained to be the head of organisations

P2

Question 55-58

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading

Passage 2: T,F,NG

55. The design for the product 'Swiffer' receives inspiration from a common housework habit.

56. When Jonah Lehrer began composing his book, he was working in a highly creative environment.

57. The singer Bob Dylan was referred to illustrate how ideas seem spontaneous.

58. From the world puzzle experiment, the neuroscientists discovered that when a connection is suddenly
made, both parts of the brain are activated.

Questions 59-62: Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-G, below.

Write the correct letter, A-G, in boxes 59-62

59. Scientists know a moment of insight is coming

60. Mental connections are much harder to make

61. Some companies require their employees to stop working

62. A team will function more successfully

A. when people are not too familiar with each other.

B. when both hemispheres of the brain show activity.

C. when people lack the experience required for problem-solving.

D. when the brain shows strong signs of distraction.

E, if people are concentrating too specifically on a problem.

F. because there is greater activity in the right side of the brain.

G. so they can boost the chance of finding solutions.

Questions 63-67: Complete the notes below. Choose ONE WORD ONLY from the passage for each
answer.

How other people influence our creativity

1. Steve Jobs

- made modifications to the (63) to enhance interaction at Pixar.

1. kehrer

- to perform well, company owners must have a diverse range of (64)

- starting (65) with strangers is important

- the (66) has not replaced the need for physical interaction.

1. Geoffrey West

- living in (67) encourages creativity.

Question 68: Choose the correct letter, A, B. C or D.

68. Which of the following is the most suitable title for Reading Passage 2?

A. Challenging conventional theories of human innovation

B. Creative solutions for promoting professional networks

C. Understanding what drives our moments of inspiration

D. How innovation ideas influence the future and people

P3

Use only ONE WORD for each answer.

Lesley Rogers' 2004 Experiment

Lateralisation:

1. Is determined by two factors: (69) and (70) factors

Laterisation in the experiment:

can be stronger for chicks if they are given (71) during the incubation period.

1. Can promote (72) as the laterised birds can use their eyes for separate tasks. These tasks
include:

Find (73) with their right eye

Monitor (74) found above

Questions 75-80: Reading Passage 3 has eight paragraphs, A-H

Which paragraph contains the following information?

Write the correct letter, A-H, in boxes 75-80 on your answer sheet.

NB: You may use any letter more than once.

75. research discoveries that were among the first to refute a previous belief.

76. description of a study which backs up another scientist's findings.

77. a claim that lateralisation would appear to be detrimental to animals.

78. the idea that having an opposing lateralization to the majority of the human population can be
advantageous.

79. reference to the vast amount of knowledge of animal lateralisation that has accumulated.

80. a statement on how lateralisation in a group can determine the group's survival.
 The Hollywood Film Industry

A. This chapter examines the ‘Golden Age’ of the Hollywood film studio system and explores how a
particular kind of filmmaking developed during this period in US film history. It also focuses on the two
key elements which influenced the emergence of the classic Hollywood studio system: the advent of
sound and the business ideal of vertical integration. In addition to its historical interest, inspecting the
growth of the studio system may offer clues regarding the kinds of struggles that accompany the growth
of any new medium. It might, in fact, be intriguing to examine which changes occurred during the growth
of the Hollywood studio, and compare those changes to contemporary struggles in which production
companies are trying to define and control emerging industries, such as online film and interactive
television.

B. The shift of the industry away from ‘silent’ films began during the late 1920s. Warner Bros.’ 1927
film The Jazz Singer was the first to feature synchronized speech, and with it came a period of turmoil
for the industry. Studios now had proof that ‘talkie’ films would make them money, but the financial
investment this kind of filmmaking would require, from new camera equipment to new projection
facilities, made the studios hesitant to invest at first. In the end, the power of cinematic sound to both
move audiences and enhance the story persuaded studios that talkies were worth investing in. Overall, the
use of sound in film was well-received by audiences, but there were still many technical factors to
consider. Although full integration of sound into movies was complete by 1930, it would take somewhat
longer for them to regain their stylistic elegance and dexterity. The camera now had to be encased in a
big, clumsy, unmoveable soundproof box. In addition, actors struggled, having to direct their speech to
awkwardly-hidden microphones in huge plants, telephones or even costumes.

C. Vertical integration is the other key component in the rise of the Hollywood studio system. The major
studios realized they could increase their profits by handling each stage of a film’s life: production
(making the film), distribution (getting the film out to people) and exhibition (owning the theaters in
major cities where films were shown first). Five studios, ‘The Big Five’, worked to achieve vertical
integration through the late 1940s, owning vast real estate on which to construct elaborate sets. In
addition, these studios set the exact terms of films’ release dates and patterns. Warner Bros., Paramount,
20th Century Fox, MGM and RKO formed this exclusive club. ‘The Little Three’ studios – Universal,
Columbia and United Artists – also made pictures, but each lacked one of the crucial elements of vertical
integration. Together these eight companies operated as a mature oligopoly, essentially running the entire
market.
 D. During the Golden Age, the studios were remarkably consistent and stable enterprises, due in large
part to long-term management heads – the infamous ‘movie moguls’ who ruled their kingdoms with iron
fists. At MGM, Warner Bros, and Columbia, the same men ran their studios for decades. The rise of the
studio system also hinges on the treatment of stars, who were constructed and exploited to suit a studio’s
image and schedule. Actors were bound up in seven-year contracts to a single studio, and the studio boss
generally held all the options. Stars could be loaned out to other production companies at any time.
Studio bosses could also force bad roles on actors, and manipulate every single detail of stars’ images
with their mammoth in-house publicity departments. Some have compared the Hollywood studio system
to a factory, and it is useful to remember that studios were out to make money first and art second.

E. On the other hand, studios also had to cultivate flexibility, in addition to consistent factory output.
Studio heads realized that they couldn’t make virtually the same film over and over again with the same
cast of stars and still expect to keep turning a profit. They also had to create product differentiation.
Examining how each production company tried to differentiate itself has led to loose characterizations of
individual studios’ styles. MGM tended to put out a lot of all-star productions while Paramount excelled
in comedy and Warner Bros, developed a reputation for gritty social realism. 20th Century Fox forged
the musical and a great deal of prestige biographies, while Universal specialized in classic horror movies.

F. In 1948, struggling independent movie producers and exhibitors finally triumphed in their battle against
the big studios’ monopolistic behavior. In the United States versus Paramount federal decree of that year, the
studios were ordered to give up their theaters in what is commonly referred to as ‘divestiture’ – opening the
market to smaller producers. This, coupled with the advent of television in the 1950s, seriously
compromised the studio system’s influence and profits. Hence, 1930 and 1948 are generally considered
bookends to Hollywood’s Golden Age.
 The Swiffer

For a fascinating tale about creativity, look at a cleaning product called the Swiffer and how it came about,
urges writer Jonah Lehrer. In the story of the Swiffer, he argues, we have the key elements in producing
breakthrough ideas: frustration, moments of insight and sheer hard work. The story starts with a
multinational company which had invented products for keeping homes spotless, and couldn't come up with
better ways to clean floors, so it hired designers to watch how people cleaned. Frustrated after hundreds of
hours of observation, they one day noticed a woman do with a paper towel what people do all the time: wipe
something up and throw it away. An idea popped into lead designer Harry West's head: the solution to their
problem was a floor mop with a disposable cleaning surface. Mountains of prototypes and years of
teamwork later, they unveiled the Swiffer, which quickly became a commercial success. Lehrer, the author
of Imagine, a new book that seeks to explain how creativity works, says this study of the imagination started
from a desire to understand what happens in the brain at the moment of sudden insight. 'But the book
definitely spiraled out of control,' Lehrer says. 'When you talk to creative people, they'll tell you about the
'eureka'* moment, but when you press them they also talk about the hard work that comes afterwards, so I
realised I needed to write about that, too. And then I realised I couldn't just look at creativity from the
perspective of the brain, because it's also about the culture and context, about the group and the team and the
way we collaborate.' When it comes to the mysterious process by which inspiration comes into your head as
if from nowhere, Lehrer says modern neuroscience has produced a 'first draft' explanation of what is
happening in the brain. He writes of how burnt out American singer Bob Dylan decided to walk away from
his musical career in 1965 and escape to a cabin in the woods, only to be overcome by a desire to write.
Apparently 'Like a Rolling Stone' suddenly flowed from his pen. 'It's like a ghost is writing a song,' Dylan
has reportedly said. 'It gives you the song and it goes away.' But it's no ghost, according to Lehrer. Instead,
the right hemisphere of the brain is assembling connections between past influences and making something
entirely new. Neuroscientists have roughly charted this process by mapping the brains of people doing word
puzzles solved by making sense of remotely connecting information For instance, subjects are given three
words such as 'age', 'mile' and 'sand' and asked to come up with a single word that can precede or follow
each of them to form a compound word. (It happens to be 'stone'.) Using brain imaging equipment,
researchers discovered that when people get the answer in an apparent flash of insight, a small fold of tissue
called the anterior superior temporal gyrus suddenly lights up just beforehand. This stays silent when the
word puzzle is solved through careful analysis. Lehrer says that this area of the brain lights up only after
we've hit the wall on a problem. Then the brain starts hunting through the 'filing cabinets of the right
hemisphere' to make the connections that produce the right answer. Studies have demonstrated it's possible
to predict a moment of insight up to eight seconds before it arrives. The predictive signal is a steady rhythm
of alpha waves emanating from the brain's right hemisphere, which are closely associated with relaxing
activities. 'When our minds are at ease when those alpha waves are rippling through the brain we're more
likely to direct the spotlight of attention towards that stream of remote associations emanating from the right
hemisphere,' Lehrer writes. 'In contrast, when we are diligently focused, our attention tends to be towards
the details of the problems we are trying to solve.' In other words, then we are less likely to make those vital
associations. So, heading out for a walk or lying down are important phases of the creative process, and
smart companies know this. Some now have a policy of encouraging staff to take time out during the day
and spend time on things that at first glance are unproductive (like playing a PC game), but daydreaming has
been shown to be positively correlated with problem-solving. However, to be more imaginative, says Lehrer,
it's also crucial to collaborate with people from a wide range of backgrounds because if colleagues are too
socially intimate, creativity is stifled. Creativity, it seems, thrives on serendipity. American entrepreneur
Steve Jobs believed so. Lehrer describes how at Pixar Animation, Jobs designed the entire workplace to
maximise the chance of strangers bumping into each other, striking up conversations and learning from one
another. He also points to a study of 766 business graduates who had gone on to own their own companies.
Those with the greatest diversity of acquaintances enjoyed far more success. Lehrer says he has taken all this
on board, and despite his inherent shyness, when he's sitting next to strangers on a plane or at a conference,
forces himself to initiate conversations. As for predictions that the rise of the Internet would make the need
for shared working space obsolete, Lehrer says research shows the opposite has occurred; when people meet
face-to-face, the level of creativity increases. This is why the kind of place we live in is so important to
innovation. According to theoretical physicist Geoffrey West, when corporate institutions get bigger, they
often become less receptive to change. Cities, however, allow our ingenuity to grow by pulling huge
numbers of different people together, who then exchange ideas. Working from the comfort of our homes
may be convenient, therefore, but it seems we need the company of others to achieve our finest 'eureka'
moments.
Glossary: Eureka: In ancient Greek, the meaning was ‘I have found!’. Now it can be used when people
suddenly find the solution to a difficult problem and want to celebrate
 Left or Right

A. Creatures across the animal kingdom have a preference for one foot, eye or even antenna. The cause
of this trait, called lateralisation, is fairly simple: one side of the brain, which generally controls the
opposite side of the body, is more dominant than the other when processing certain tasks. This does, on
some occasions, let the animal down, such as when a toad fails to escape from a snake approaching from
the right, just because it’s right eye is worse at spotting danger than its left. So why would animals evolve
a characteristic that seems to endanger them?

B. For many years it was assumed that lateralisation was a uniquely human trait, but this notion rapidly
fell apart as researchers started uncovering evidence of lateralisation in all sorts of animals. For example,
In the 1970s. Lesley Rogers, now at the University of New England in Australia, was studying memory
and learning in chicks.

She had been injecting a chemical into chicks’ brains to stop them learning how to spot grains of food
among distracting pebbles, and was surprised to observe that the chemical only worked when applied to
the left hemisphere of the brain. That strongly suggested that the right side of the chicks brain played
little or no role in the learning of such behaviours. Similar evidence appeared in songbirds and rats
around same time, and since then, researchers have built up an impressive catalogue of animal
lateralisation.

C. In some animals, lateralisation is simply a preference for a single paw or foot, while in others it
appears in more general patterns of behaviour. The left side of most vertebrate brains, for example, seems
to process and control feeding. Since the left hemisphere processes input from the right side of the body,
that means animals as diverse as fish, toads and birds are more likely to attack prey or food items viewed
with their right eye. Even humpback whales prefer to use the right side of their jaws to scrape sand eels
from the ocean floor.

D. Genetics plays a part in determining lateralisation, but environmental factors have an impact too.
Rogers found that a chick’s lateralisation depends on whether it is exposed to light before hatching from
its egg – if it is kept in the dark during this period, neither hemisphere becomes dominant. In 2004,
Rogers used this observation to test the advantages of brain bias in chicks faced with the challenge of
multitasking.
She hatched chicks with either strong or weak lateralisation, then presented the two groups with food
hidden among small pebbles and the threatening shape of a fake predator flying overhead. As predicted,
the birds incubated in the light looked for food mainly with their right eye, while using the other to check
out the predator The weakly-lateralized chicks, meanwhile, had difficulty performing these two activities
simultaneously.

E. Similar results probably hold true for many other animals. In 2006, Angelo Bisazza at the University
of Padua set out to observe the differences in feeding behaviour between strongly- lateralized and
weakly-lateralized fish. He found that strongly-lateralized individuals were able to feed twice as fast as
weakly-lateralized ones when there was a threat of a predator looming above them. Assigning different
jobs to different brain halves may be especially advantageous for animals such as birds or fish, whose
eyes are placed on the sides of their heads. This enables them to process input from each side separately,
with different tasks in mind.

F. And what of those animals who favour a specific side for almost all tasks? In2009,MariaMagat and
Culum Brown at Macquarie University in Australia wanted to see if there was general cognitive
advantage in lateralisation. To investigate, they turned to parrots, which can be either strongly right- or
left-footed, or ambidextrous (without dominance). The parrots were given the intellectually demanding
task of pulling a snack on a string up to their beaks, using a coordinated combination of claws and beak.
The results showed that the parrots with the strongest foot preferences worked out the puzzle far more
quickly than their ambidextrous peers.

G. A further puzzle is why are there always a few exceptions, like left-handed humans, who are wired
differently from the majority of the population? Giorgio Vallortigora and Stefano Ghirlanda of
Stockholm University seem to have found the answer via mathematical models. These have shown that a
group of fish is likely to survive a shark attack with the fewest casualties if the majority turn together in
one direction while a very small proportion of the group escape in the direction that the predator is not
expecting.

H. This imbalance of lateralisation within populations may also have advantages for individuals. Whereas
most co-operative interactions require participants to react similarly, there are some situations – such as
aggressive interactions – where it can benefit an individual to launch an attack from an unexpected
quarter. Perhaps this can portly explain the existence of left-handers in human societies. It has been
suggested that when it comes to hand-to-hand fighting, left-handers may have the advantage over the
right-handed majority. Where survival depends on the element of surprise, it may indeed pay to be
different.