I loved reading the primary source of Father Peter Pernin’s account of the Peshtigo Fire. Not only does he give a detailed account of the catastrophe, but he also writes with literary fluidity, which allows the reader to become even more engrossed in what occurred in Peshtigo. I agree with caschmidt<\/a>\u00a0in that reading a primary source of a disaster was very refreshing, and it is definitely necessary for better understanding natural disasters when primary sources are available.<\/p>\n Not only do primary sources give us a perceptive account of historical events, but they also give us an eye into what the people were like of the time and how that affected their outlook on the events. Knowing that Pernin is a priest, he was an important figure of the town as demonstrated by the many people who knew him during the events. This gives us a totally different perspective than one of the laborers in the town that were only there for a short while in order to build the railroad. I also like how Pernin pointed out that we learn from danger. That is the premise of this course and how to better understand natural disasters so that we can \u00a0learn the most possible from them. Throughout the beginning of his account, he writes about the ill-prepared not making it through the disaster; this goes back to our discussion about preparedness and how that can affect the impact of the disaster on society. Preparedness, or lack thereof, is of utmost importance to preventing disasters, and this account shows that Peshtigo was not ready, and the people did not want to deal with disaster even when it was bearing down on their backs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I loved reading the primary source of Father Peter Pernin’s account of the Peshtigo Fire. Not only does he give a detailed account of the catastrophe, but he also writes with literary fluidity, which allows the reader to become even more engrossed in what occurred in Peshtigo. I agree with caschmidt\u00a0in that reading a primary … <\/p>\n