In the spring of 1912, the infamous Titanic accident had occurred and many people like, Deborah Hopkinson, wrote books about the event. Deborah Hopkinson wrote the Sibert Medal-winning book, The Voices from the Disaster, and it was very factual but some things could have been improved. The Voices of the Disaster could be better by going into more details, clarifying confusion, and explaining. Talking more about the suction pull and why the rescue symbol was changed would help intrigue readers. Deborah Hopkinson would have written an even better book if more details and explanations were included.
If Deborah Hopkinson had explained more about certain events readers would be more interested. For example, when the passengers were in lifeboats they were talking about the suction pull, but she did not explain what it was. It turns out that the suction pull is actually a false theory. The theory is that when a boat sinks it will suck down anything nearby with it to fill the space …show more content…
While Hopkinson was explaining that the emergency symbol had changed from CQD to SOS she didn’t explain what they stand for and it caused some confusion. A writer should always clarify confusion, and in this book, that virtue was not clearly shown. If the author explained that the symbols meant come quick danger and save our ship it would clarify the confusion. Also, the author should have explained the reasoning of the switch. SOS had less of a chance of misinterpretation that CQD because there are fewer symbols and the symbols are easily separated. It can be good to leave a reader with a question, but not if it’s going to cause confusion, and going into a bit more detail doesn’t hurt. Clarifying confusion is a great way to keep readers interested in a book, and If the author of The Voices of the Titanic had included it in her work the book would be much