After taking both texts into account, I strongly believe that Text Two does a more impressive job at giving an account of someone who survives life-threatening situations as compared to Text One. Hence, I choose Text Two.
Firstly, Juanita Watson adds short sentences for a more dramatic effect. These short sentences make her already heart-gripping story even more breath-taking and shocking. This can be noted in the following examples: “And it’s especially great to be alive” and “I suddenly found myself falling. Sixty feet”. Instead of composing it into one, long sentence, the writer breaks it down with exaggeration; therefore, grasping the reader’s attention.
Second of all, Watson gives an account of her feelings at the time of her “adventure”. She narrates about the trauma she almost fell into and the wounds that adorned her body, but how she was sensible enough to take action despite these obstacles. For example, “The odds were stacked against me. But I didn’t let my mind focus too much on that”. The writer describes how she aided to her own wounds and nursed her broken hip. She pushed the thought of death away, prayed and kept going.
I did not choose Text One for the reason that it lacked detail. Sally Williams overlooked several essential details including an account of how she personally felt regarding the life-threatening circumstances. Her story was nerve-wrecking and cringe-worthy; however, she failed to deliver it in an appropriate and suitable manner. One might observe this in the following example: “Koepcke didn’t have any tools for survival such as a machete or plastic boots”. Williams is at a loss when it comes to emotions, hence unable to connect with her readers. As if that was not enough, that statement (along with many others in the passage) were mundane and flat. Where were the expressions? Where was the emotional appeal? The writer truly has a long way to go before she can actually get her readers hooked.
Froebelian Writers 