The eyewitness accounts “Comprehending the calamity” by Emma Burke is a personal narrative and“ Horrific wreck of the city” by Fred Hewitt is also a personal narrative are similar because …… but are different because there similar because they both describe how the earthquake destroyed the town, but they are different because “Comprehending the Calamity” informs that people came together in a crisis and on the other hand “Horrific wreck of the city” informs that the earthquake was awful. In the story “Comprehending the calamity” and “Horrific wreck of the city” both explain how the earthquake destroyed the town. In the story “Comprehending the calamity” and “Horrific wreck of the city” both explain how the earthquake destroyed the town. …show more content…
In the story “Comprehending the calamity” and “Horrific wreck of the city” both explain how the earthquake destroyed the town. In “Comprehending the calamity” it says “The shock came, and hurled my bed against an opposite wall. I sprang up, and, holding firmly to the foot-board managed to keep on my feet to the door. The shock was constantly growing heavier; rumbles, crackling noises, and falling objects.”In “Horrific wreck of the city” it said “For an hour more after that terrible shock, which shook the buildings of all San Francisco to the very foundations, people wandered about in an insane fashion. There was no attempt to hold the sufferers. People were stupefied as the inferno raged and reigned supreme.”This text proves that they were describing what was happening to the town because it was talking about how buildings were down and people didn’t know what to do about the problem. These two pieces of evidence are similar because they are both talking about how it’s hurting the community and what is happening to them and other people. This proves that it was describing what was going on because the text is saying that everything was moving around and at the same time she was moving.This proves that it was describing what was going on because the text is saying that everything was moving around and at the same time she was moving.In conclusion, These two stories were talking about how there buildings were getting destroyed in the earthquake. The difference between the two eyewitness accounts are that in “comprehending the calamity” it is informed that people came together in time of a crisis. On the other hand “Horrific wreck of the city” it is informed that the earthquake is awful.In “Comprehending the calamity” it said “No one can comprehend the calamity to San Francisco in its entirety. The individual experience can probably give the general public the clearest idea. I was one of the fortunate ones, for neither personal injury nor death visited my household; but what I saw and felt I will try to give to you.”P.1. In “Horrific wreck of the city” it said “No story will ever be written that will tell the awfulness of the thirty-hours following the terrible earthquake. No pen of the most powerful description the world ever saw could ever place on paper the impression of any one of the hundreds of thousands who felt the mighty tremble. No pen can record the sufferings of those who were crushed to death or buried in the ruins that encompassed them in an instant after 5:13 o’clock Wednesday Morning.”P.1. This proves that they were more gentle than “Horrific wreck of the city” because they didn’t make a big deal out of it and also because and the author was trying to let the reader understand that it was hard.On the other hand this story said it more harshly by saying that it was the hardest thing and it was hard and scary. On the other hand this story said it more harshly by saying that it was the hardest thing and it was hard and scary. There two pieces of evidence are different because “Comprehending the calamity” is more gentle and saying that it was hard but it was gladly over. On the other hand “Horrific wreck of the city” was more aggressive and the reader right away knew that it was hard but this story was being more dramatic. In conclusion, This proves that these two stories are different because the story “Comprehending the calamity” was more gentle and the other story “Horrific wreck of the city” was more aggressive. In conclusion, The story “Comprehending the calamity” by Emma Burke and “Horrific wreck of the city” by Fred Hewitt are both similar because they both describe how the town was destroyed, but they have a lot of differences but one is that “Comprehending the calamity” informs that people are coming together in a time of crisis and “Horrific wreck of the city” is that it inform that the earthquake is awful. But here is a question for you: If you were one of the people in either story which one would it be and why? The eyewitness accounts “Comprehending the calamity” by Emma Burke is a personal narrative and“ Horrific wreck of the city” by Fred Hewitt is also a personal narrative are similar because …… but are different because there similar because they both describe how the earthquake destroyed the town, but they are different because “Comprehending the Calamity” informs that people came together in a crisis and on the other hand “Horrific wreck of the city” informs that the earthquake was awful. In the story “Comprehending the calamity” and “Horrific wreck of the city” both explain how the earthquake destroyed the town. In the story “Comprehending the calamity” and “Horrific wreck of the city” both explain how the earthquake destroyed the town.
In the story “Comprehending the calamity” and “Horrific wreck of the city” both explain how the earthquake destroyed the town. In “Comprehending the calamity” it says “The shock came, and hurled my bed against an opposite wall. I sprang up, and, holding firmly to the foot-board managed to keep on my feet to the door. The shock was constantly growing heavier; rumbles, crackling noises, and falling objects.”In “Horrific wreck of the city” it said “For an hour more after that terrible shock, which shook the buildings of all San Francisco to the very foundations, people wandered about in an insane fashion. There was no attempt to hold the sufferers. People were stupefied as the inferno raged and reigned supreme.”This text proves that they were describing what was happening to the town because it was talking about …show more content…
how buildings were down and people didn’t know what to do about the problem. These two pieces of evidence are similar because they are both talking about how it’s hurting the community and what is happening to them and other people. This proves that it was describing what was going on because the text is saying that everything was moving around and at the same time she was moving.This proves that it was describing what was going on because the text is saying that everything was moving around and at the same time she was moving.In conclusion, These two stories were talking about how there buildings were getting destroyed in the earthquake. The difference between the two eyewitness accounts are that in “comprehending the calamity” it is informed that people came together in time of a crisis.
On the other hand “Horrific wreck of the city” it is informed that the earthquake is awful.In “Comprehending the calamity” it said “No one can comprehend the calamity to San Francisco in its entirety. The individual experience can probably give the general public the clearest idea. I was one of the fortunate ones, for neither personal injury nor death visited my household; but what I saw and felt I will try to give to you.”P.1. In “Horrific wreck of the city” it said “No story will ever be written that will tell the awfulness of the thirty-hours following the terrible earthquake. No pen of the most powerful description the world ever saw could ever place on paper the impression of any one of the hundreds of thousands who felt the mighty tremble. No pen can record the sufferings of those who were crushed to death or buried in the ruins that encompassed them in an instant after 5:13 o’clock Wednesday Morning.”P.1. This proves that they were more gentle than “Horrific wreck of the city” because they didn’t make a big deal out of it and also because and the author was trying to let the reader understand that it was hard.On the other hand this story said it more harshly by saying that it was the hardest thing and it was hard and scary. On the other hand this story said it more harshly by saying that it was the hardest thing
and it was hard and scary. There two pieces of evidence are different because “Comprehending the calamity” is more gentle and saying that it was hard but it was gladly over. On the other hand “Horrific wreck of the city” was more aggressive and the reader right away knew that it was hard but this story was being more dramatic. In conclusion, This proves that these two stories are different because the story “Comprehending the calamity” was more gentle and the other story “Horrific wreck of the city” was more aggressive. In conclusion, The story “Comprehending the calamity” by Emma Burke and “Horrific wreck of the city” by Fred Hewitt are both similar because they both describe how the town was destroyed, but they have a lot of differences but one is that “Comprehending the calamity” informs that people are coming together in a time of crisis and “Horrific wreck of the city” is that it inform that the earthquake is awful. But here is a question for you: If you were one of the people in either story which one would it be and why?
There was a massive earthquake in San Francisco during the year of 1906. The country of United States went through great loss because of this massacre. Nearly 250,000 people had become homeless as the result of this great earthquake. Winchester pointed out the question: How unprepared was America when this disaster hit? He compared the San Francisco earthquake to the Katrina hurricane in 2005.
Earthquake: a series of vibrations induced in the earth’s crust by the abrupt rupture and rebound of rocks in which elastic strain has been slowly accumulating; something that is severely disruptive; upheaval (Shravan). Tsunami: an unusually large sea wave produced by a seaquake or undersea volcanic eruption (Shravan). Combine these two catastrophic natural disasters, and it will be a day that will forever live in infamy through terror; a day much like that of October 28, 1746 in Lima, Peru, in which an entire city was destroyed within mere minutes. Author Charles Walker guides his audience through the devastation and wreckage of this heartbroken town and into the economic, political, religious, and social fallout that followed. Walker argues that the aftermath of this tragedy transformed into a voting of the citizens’ various ideas perceived of the future of Lima, theological consequences, and the structure of the colonial rule (p. 12).
The Haiti earthquake that occurred on January 12, 2010 just fifteen miles south of the Haitian capital of Port-au-Prince was a severely large-scale earthquake, at a magnitude of 7.0. The initial shock was then followed by a series of aftershocks with magnitudes ranging up to 5.9. Over three hundred thousand people died due to this extreme chaos. Many buildings collapsed and disintegrated under the force of the quake; both the cathedral and National Palace in Port-au-Prince were heavily damaged. In the aftermath of this tragedy, efforts to aid the people of Haiti with medical assistance, water, and food were hampered by the loss of communication lines as well as by roads blocked by debris. Over one million people were left homeless due to this quake. Two days after the earthquake, journalist Leonard Pitts wrote “Sometimes the Earth is Cruel,” an article describing how the people of Haiti responded to the disaster. In “Sometimes the Earth is Cruel,” a major theme is that some things are inevitable.
When one of the worst earthquakes ever hits the town of San Francisco panic ensues, but not for everyone. On April 18, 1906, at 5:15 am the city of San Francisco was demolished by a 7.8 magnitude earthquake which also led to many fires being started. There was $350m in estimated damages, and 400-750 people perished in the earthquake and fire. Around 490 city blocks were destroyed, causing 250,000 people to become homeless (A Brief Account, SF Tourism Tips). In the aftermath of the earthquake there were many eyewitness accounts written about it. The eyewitness account, “Comprehending the Calamity,” by Emma Burke and the eyewitness account,"Horrific Wreck of the City" by Fred Hewitt both describe the same event, but they both have very different
In the novel, a father had thoughtfully kept himself and his son some bread, but after his son saw he was hiding the bread, even though his father had him some too, the son attacked his father. The son didn’t care that his father had him bread aswell, he wanted it all to himself, so he could have more. In order to do so, the boy killed his father and took the bread for himself. Next, in New York City, an earthquake occurred and everyone inside of the buildings that were being demolished, falling in, etc all reacted differently to the situation. Some froze, others just screamed, and several other things.
Twain uses words such as vomiting, squirming, grinding, terrific, disgusted, and foolishness. Although the context surrounding each word is different, the words are there simply show the reader how intense the earthquake was or how ridiculous people acted when facing a frightening situation. The words are in place to not only add the emphasis on the earthquake, but they do it for the people and their actions, for the things that took place, and for what he witnessed in general. Just as Twain used words that intensify his writing, London's words are more violent rather than sweet and short, but they have the same intention. London uses words like, smashed, piled, humped, burst, twitching, and thrown. His words are more violent because London is trying to really emphasize the destruction rather than the actions of people. London's’ word choice adds more imagery for the reader and it adds more interest and
In the story of The Island of “Kora”, the island had been devastated by a violent earthquake that had been triggered by a volcano eruption four years earlier. The island which had prior to the disaster been about twenty square miles in size and been reduced to less than a fourth that size to about four square miles. The island prior to the earthquakes had previously been able to support comfortably 850 to 900 people. It was a peaceful island where the inhabitants got along well. Because of the disasters the lives of the inhabitants had been changed forever.
"The Most Terrible Was Yet To Come": San Francisco Earthquake and Fire of 1906." Map of Time A Trip Into the Past. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 May 2014.
The 1906 San Francisco earthquake was one of the largest earthquakes in the United States. Even though it only lasted less than a minute, the damages and aftermath of the earthquake were disastrous. These damages were not just from the earthquake, but also from other hazards that occurred because of it. It also had a huge effect on the people living in San Francisco. Many people, the government, and other countries helped the city of San Francisco with relief goods like food and clothing. The city used up their resources in order to rebuild the city and spent a lot of money. This earthquake also started a scientific revolution about earthquakes and its effects.
The ruins are places that are lifeless and in shambles. The ruins represent loss. If the ruins are a town, then the state in which the ruins are located in experiences loss. This idea of loss is very surfaced here. From reading the text once, it seems that the ruins only represent the loss of a place. The people living in that town before the destruction experience the loss of their home. Kristen visits a place called Gary. Gary is completely lifeless and is described as, “it’s like someone pulled a fire alarm and no one ever came back” by Andrew on page 25. When Kristen and Andrew are searching around, Kristen picks up pictures and does not know why they are there but takes them anyway. She did some researching and came to the conclusion that the pictures were of a man named Seth Thomas. Seth had passed away in 2006 by being hit on the Norfolk Southern Railroad Line in Gary. The ruins they visited were Seth’s memorial. This represents not only the state losing the town of Gary, but Seth’s family losing him. When a family loses a member, they may experience loss and grief. This family is now grieving over the loss of a son, brother, and friend. Kristen eventually loses the pictures while on her
David McCullough’s Johnstown Flood is an unique piece of nonfiction that tells the story of how a normal town in the middle of Pennsylvania encounters a devastating, and life altering event. This event was the Johnstown flood, and fire (that resulted from the flood) leading to the death of 2,209 people. This book starts out with how the town came to be a small, but prosperous home for millionaires such as Andrew Carnegie. Then, McCullough proceeds to let the reader feel as if they are in the town experiencing these devastating events, and creates a seamless storyline. Even though the book focuses on the flood other recalls of important events that show us the everyday life of the town, and makes extremely helpful references to historical passages that increase the context for the reader. Finally the book ends with how Johnstown recovers from the devastation in life, land, and property.
Judith Shklar begins her theoretical work with an historical account of the 1755 Lisbon earthquake. The townspeople who were impacted were also adamant that this natural disaster was a punishment from God. However, other well-known philosophers, with the exception of Voltaire, shared different perspectives on where to place the blame. Rousseau strongly believed that the individuals who had political power were responsible for the earthquake’s impact. His reasoning stems from his knowledge of the city’s construction of houses with multiple stories that were not built to last against extreme force. In this case, the number of deaths could have been prevented if city officials were aware of the importance of satisfying housing regulations. Kant encouraged those around him to learn about the science behind earthquakes as well as proposed that wars are disasters. This is an excellent scenario where Shklar introduces her argument
There are many ways that both "Aunty Misery" and "The Crane Maiden" are alike and different. This essay will be comparing and contrasting the stories. They have common and different things about both these two stories. This essay will be showing how these stories are alike and different.
In the two poems “Facing it” and “The names” there is a great deal of similarities and differences that can be compared and contrasted between the two pieces of writing. Some of these comparisons being in the similar themes of each poem, the difference in situations that are being used, and the differences in how they go about explaining the aftermath and effects of so much death and/or tragedy.
A violent earthquake shook the land, giant waves rolled over the shores, and the island sank into the sea, never to be seen again.”