Does this make sense?

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by East Street Trader
It is figurative.

Quite powerfully so.

My bet would be metaphorical though (the shadows of the people = their memories, things to indicate they were there, etc.)

Wrong.

[Wittlich]

I concur with Wiglaf. The "shadows" is the imprint of the shape of the body(ies) on the structures after the nuclear wave disintegrated them. Their bodies caused a shadow on the structures behind them when the nuclear wave hit them.

Quite simple if you think about it.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Wittlich
I concur with Wiglaf.

Oh my god . . . .


so do I.

[East Street Trader]

" ... nothing remained except their shadows, burned into asphalt pavements or stone walls."

The writer could have said "... nothing remained except a mark, on asphalt pavements or stone walls, to show where they had been when they were incinerated."

But that is dull. Instead he or she took the notion of a shadow - a thing rather similar to the marks made - and the idea of something burned in and produced a powerful image.

The writer is not concerned accurately to describe the process which produces the mark. He or she wants to get across as graphically as they can how suddenly, completely and violently the people were snuffed out.

[Wiglaf]

Sorry honey, they aren't "marks", they're shadows ingrained into the pavement. "Marks" would just be awful writing.

The guy's description isn't completely scientific but he's presumably not a scientist. It's accurate enough and isn't trying to be metaphorical. Though of course it is a powerful image, the atom bomb did the work for him.

[East Street Trader]

I bow to your obduracy.

[unscratchedfoot]

Use a proper title on the thread. People gotta be pretty bored to be attracted by this title, and even more bored to be interested in the content. I'm just doing my part to improve the quality of the forum.