How did the choice to tell the story as an oral history impact the emotional depth?
Around the Web·geçen ay


Okur tartışması şimdi açık. Doğrulanmış yazar bu profili talep ettikten sonra katılabilir.
How did the choice to tell the story as an oral history impact the emotional depth?
Did anyone else find the multiple perspectives added to the sense of chaos?
I wonder what led the author to focus so heavily on the aftermath rather than the outbreak itself?