May 22nd, 2013
World War Z vs. To Kill A Mockingbird
The books, “World War Z” and, “To Kill A Mockingbird” are both amazing books, with many differences. The first way that the two books differ is in their structure. In World War Z, the book is more of a compilation of many stories of survivors. It takes place in a bunch of places and is structured so you can see the political, civilian, and military views of the war. To Kill A Mockingbird, on the other hand, is structured in a way that tells a chronological story of the adventures of the narrator and their adventures as a child. The structure is much more of an analysis of why she did things as a child, while World War Z is plain stories.
Although their structure might be different, there is one similarity that popped out at me while I was reading both these books. They are both written in a narrative style. This helps with telling the story in an interesting and simple way. The narrator in World War Z is an unnamed interviewer, while the main character in To Kill A Mockingbird is the narrator.
A second difference of World War Z and To Kill A Mockingbird is their locations. World War Z jumps all around the world to see different views of the zombie apocalypse. They are able to show how it affected certain parts of the world more or less so the reader could have a world view.In To Kill A Mockingbird, the view is much smaller. The views of the few people in the neighborhood is the only one, so everything is more personal and everyone has a more in depth view on different characters.
The second similarity of these two books are their strong character values. The characters in both of these believe in a certain thing and are willing to put themselves in danger to support their views. An example of this would be how Jem reacts to the jury’s conclusion. He becomes angry and believes it is completely unfair. This happens in World War Z when the family of three is moving...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document