In her article, “The Really Big One,”, Kathryn Schulz explores the topic of earthquakes that are expected to happen in the near future. Throughout the article, Schulz refers to a specific earthquake along the San Andreas fault line as “the big one.” Since the path of tectonic plates is highly predictable, geologists believe that an earthquake of 8.0 magnitude or greater will strike California within the next decade. This earthquake could potentially level the entire Northwestern United States and cause a financial fallout in major cities - such as Seattle and Salem. Schulz further backs the anticipated consequences by describing how an earthquake of similar magnitude “killed more than eighteen thousand people, devastated northeast Japan, triggered
…show more content…
In order to explain why an earthquake of 8.0 magnitude or greater would have detrimental effects on the Pacific Northwest, the story’s main purpose is to present the reader with a brief technical background on earthquakes. In order to show the relations between the earthquake in Japan and “the big one”, Schulz refers to this story throughout the introduction. Unlike in Raa’s and Gawande’s article, Schulz introduction does not include the thesis. Schulz doesn’t explicitly state her thesis until further in the article, at which point she states “how unprepared the Pacific Northwest is to face” the big one. Though introducing the thesis after the introduction worked well for Schulz, it is a very hard technique to pull off. Since almost all of my sources and claims, in my paper, will refer back to the thesis in some way, I believe that the more traditional style of including the thesis in the introduction would create a more organized …show more content…
By punctuating the article with personal accounts from earthquake victims, Schulz fortifies her statements and brings a sense of accuracy to them. An example of this can be seen when Schulz uses a quote from Kevin Cupples, “We can’t save them”, to further back her claim that the disabled and elderly would have little chance of surviving an earthquake. Another way Schulz writing style is different than that of Gawande’s and Rao’s, is that she utilizes statistics and facts to further back her arguments. Gawande and Rao often used stories to prove their points, which made their claims highly arguable. By using, and citing, statistical facts, Schulz creates claims that are almost impossible to argue with. By stating the previous economical effects of an earthquake, Schulz is able to present the reader with a number that will undeniably plummet the economy of the Pacific Northwest. Her technique of integrating statistics throughout the article is something I wish to do in my paper. I believe that it will allow for a paper that is more persuasive than that of Rao’s or
In order to explain why an earthquake of 8.0 magnitude or greater would have detrimental effects on the Pacific Northwest, the story’s main purpose is to present the reader with a brief technical background on earthquakes. In order to show the relations between the earthquake in Japan and “the big one”, Schulz refers to this story throughout the introduction. Unlike in Raa’s and Gawande’s article, Schulz introduction does not include the thesis. Schulz doesn’t explicitly state her thesis until further in the article, at which point she states “how unprepared the Pacific Northwest is to face” the big one. Though introducing the thesis after the introduction worked well for Schulz, it is a very hard technique to pull off. Since almost all of my sources and claims, in my paper, will refer back to the thesis in some way, I believe that the more traditional style of including the thesis in the introduction would create a more organized …show more content…
By punctuating the article with personal accounts from earthquake victims, Schulz fortifies her statements and brings a sense of accuracy to them. An example of this can be seen when Schulz uses a quote from Kevin Cupples, “We can’t save them”, to further back her claim that the disabled and elderly would have little chance of surviving an earthquake. Another way Schulz writing style is different than that of Gawande’s and Rao’s, is that she utilizes statistics and facts to further back her arguments. Gawande and Rao often used stories to prove their points, which made their claims highly arguable. By using, and citing, statistical facts, Schulz creates claims that are almost impossible to argue with. By stating the previous economical effects of an earthquake, Schulz is able to present the reader with a number that will undeniably plummet the economy of the Pacific Northwest. Her technique of integrating statistics throughout the article is something I wish to do in my paper. I believe that it will allow for a paper that is more persuasive than that of Rao’s or