Compare the effectiveness of two short extracts (10 marks)

Extract A: 'The bomb fell. The street vanished. Mary screamed.'
Extract B: 'When the bomb fell at 4.07 that Tuesday afternoon, the long terrace of Victorian houses on Albert Street, with their carefully tended window boxes and their faintly grimy net curtains, simply ceased to exist, and Mary — Mary, who had been fixing a cup of tea — opened her mouth and produced a sound she did not recognise as her own.'

Question: Which extract more effectively conveys the horror of the moment? Refer closely to both extracts in your answer.

Mark scheme (10 marks — banded, AO4):

• Band 5 (9–10): Perceptive comparative evaluation. Recognises that effectiveness is purpose-dependent, not absolute. Argues, e.g., that A's parataxis and asyndeton ('The bomb fell. The street vanished.') deliver shock, but B's hypotaxis and accumulating subordinate clauses build a horror of recognition — the slow registering of catastrophe. Cites the alienating depersonalisation 'a sound she did not recognise as her own' as more psychologically penetrating than A's bare verb 'screamed'. Concludes with qualified judgement.
• Band 4 (7–8): Clear comparative evaluation with apt references and named techniques.
• Band 3 (5–6): Sound comparison, identifying differences in sentence structure and effect, but evaluation is broad.
• Band 2 (3–4): Limited comparison; mostly descriptive, possibly preferring one extract on personal taste.
• Band 1 (1–2): Brief, descriptive comments without genuine comparison.
• Band 0 (0): Nothing creditworthy.