Some people may have experience a situation where they thought their world was ending. Some may haven’t. Either way, they would know what it is like, for instance, a natural disaster. Especially about an earthquake. Imagine the rumbling beneath your feet, just as you are about to go to school. You’re not sure what’s happening, only to find out that your town is ablaze. As you are imagining this, think about the many people who have lost their lives during this disaster, or the one of thousands of survivors who have survived San Francisco’s greatest feat: The Great Earthquake of 1906. In the eyewitness account “Comprehending the Calamity”, the author Emma Burke witnesses what happens during the San Francisco Earthquake, including the fire, the water shortage, and the camp set up at Golden Gate National Park. In the eyewitness account “The Horrific Wreck of the City”, author Fred Hewitt witnesses the same earthquake as Emma Burke, only he hasn’t seen the silver lining of the dark cloud. He has lost many friends in this earthquake, and it has been very hard for him. In the eyewitness accounts “Comprehending the Calamity” by Emma Burke, and “The Horrific Wreck of the City” by Fred Hewitt, there is an aspect of similarity in both articles. Although, their differences in their view about if it brings out the best or worst in people is what sets …show more content…
One difference between the article “Comprehending the Calamity” by Emma Burke, and “The Horrific Wreck of the City” by Fred Hewitt is that Fred Hewitt’s tone is more pessimistic, but Emma Burke’s tone is more optimistic. Another difference is that Emma Burke’s title is more gentle while Fred Hewitt’s title is more aggressive. A piece of text evidence that supports this is, from “The Horrific Wreck of the City” on page 2, author Fred Hewitt states, “For an hour more after that terrible shock, which shook the buildings of all San Francisco to the