I'm on the fence as to whether or not I should give "Earthquake at Dawn" 3 stars or 3.5 stars.
I finished "Earthquake at Dawn" at 1AM because I couldn't sleep but ended up having mixed reactions about it. I felt no connection to the main characters, which surprised me. The book had potential with Edith Irvine as its main character; she was a fascinating female photographer who, at age 22, survived the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and broke the law by taking pictures of the aftermath. And not just a few pictures, but around sixty. Under the conditions she was working and the fact that it was 1906 photography with glass plates, that is really impressive! However, Ms. Gregory decided to introduce a fictional character, Daisy Valentine, to be both narrator and Edith assistant. All potential for an interesting heroine went down the drain very quickly. Daisy is, to be frank, a very boring narrator when Edith herself had huge narrating potential.
The saving grace of this book is thanks to Mary Exa's 32 page letter. Mary Exa survived the earthquake and wrote a thirty-two page letter that gave great details about her experiences. In Ms. Gregory's story, Daisy and Edith meet Mary Exa and the refugees she stayed with during the aftermath and, in that manner, experience the things through Daisy and Edith that the real life Mary Exa experienced. It gave great detail and I learned a lot about the aftermath through it. It was fascinating. In fact, I think I'd rather have read Mary Exa's thirty-two page letter! Every chapter began with a short excerpt from Mary Exa's letter, which foretold what would happen in the forthcoming chapter. To be honest, Mary Exa's letter is the sole reason I'd give this book 3.5 stars. It was fascinating and I learned a lot... but I have never found a pair of young heroines so disinteresting.
One other small note: Religion. There's a few spots where religion just pops up out of nowhere and it feels awkward and a little forced, but then it made a bit more sense when I read the Discussion With The Author and everything was"God, God, Bible, God". It was odd, though, the way she sometimes forced a showing of religion into it.
All in all, it was a quick read. Not bad, per se, but not the best either. If you're looking to be entertained, look else. But this book does act as a really good window into what life was like during and after the San Franciscoearthquake, so it's good if you like history.