By: Leizel Joy T. Valdez

The article that I would critique is entitled “The Killing of the Mammoth”. The author of this article is Henry Tukeman the content of this article is about the prehistoric animal that exceed. When the first time that I have read this article it confuse me and made me think deeper because of the implicit and explicit claims that have been used.
On the first paragraph of the first page about the article of The Killing of the Mammoth, the author himself tell about the specimen that they secured the “Conradi Mammoth”. As I have read the said article I have found bias on the first paragraph, “ It was I then, Henry Tukeman, who secured the specimen of the “ Conradi Mammoth” as it has been called, now in the Smithsonian museum, Washington, U.S.A., pictures of which monopolized the papers and magazines in the summer of last year, and over which the scientist of both continents are still quarreling. Mr. Conradi’s offer to me was of such magnitude ( at least three times what I could have expected to get from any other source) that I, a poor man,found myself unable to refuse it. Many people will, undoubtedly, call me unpatriotic in thus allowing a foreign country to obtain this wonderful specimen, and to this charge I can only reply that the re-purchase of Washington Hall, with its noble deer park and broad acres, has been the dream of my life. For, till my father broke the entail and sold the estate, it had been handed down from father to son since the time of William the First, as the date and the Latin inscription over the old stable doorway testify.” I can say that this is a bias because the first paragraph only contains the life or the background of the author and didn’t tell about his relationship to the man that could give him such offer that he could not refuse it is Mr.Condradi.
On the second paragraph, It would be so great if the author tell what transportation or how he reach Fort Yukon . on the 4th paragraph“and I listened later to many an interesting your from the old tribesmen” in this statement the author could exchange listened later and disregard “an” in the sentence to make it more understandable.
On the third paragraph, “The Hudson Bay Company abandoned Fort Yukon many years ago, but the statement that I was a “Hudson Bay man” (an unpaid account was my mental justification), and the fact that I had some years’ experience with northern Indians, enable me soon to become intimate with the tribe, though at the expense of losing the society of the white residents of the fort”. In this paragraph, I found it bias because it only favors on the author in addition I found some opinions and claims of fact because at the same time narrator emphasized that he is a “Hudson Bay Man” also and claims it”.
On the fifth paragraph,“Once, many summers ago, me an’ Soon-thai, we go up the Porcupine River — Soon-thai is my son; he is dead now. By an’ by we leave the river, an’ go up a little river many days, to the mountain. But the mountain is too steep an’ very high, an’ we cannot climb up it. We go back a little way, an’ we shoot a moose at the mouth of a little gully. Soon-thai, he goes off, an’ he finds the gully ends in a little cliff, an’ he climbs up it, an’ finds a cave. He is brave, Soon-thai, he goes in the cave, an’ at the end is a small hole, an’ Soon-thai looks through it, an’ sees an easy way to climb up the mountain. There is a creek in the gully, which runs in the ground near the cave , but the water is bad”. Soon-thai, Soon-thai, Soon-thai. The whole statement focuses in one person and that is the son of the Joe and that never took chance to describe other thing but only Soon-thai. On this paragraph I could find it slanting because it was very persuasive that could manipulate the mind of the readers and the imaginative mind of the readers like me will work and bring me on setting where Joe and his son, Soon-thai, but it is just my opinion as a reader. On the other hand the “Do not seek Tee-Kai-Koa, white man, lest you have no tale to tell us as I have told you.” this statement is on last sentence of second page and first sentence of third page, I could say it is a reading between the lines because the author didn’t directly state that Joe knew the thoughts of himself
“And I found, after becoming intimate with him, that he had as much curiosity as I had about Tee-Kai-Koa and a profound contempt for the superstition of its being a devil” on the second paragraph of the third page I can say that this statement is untested claims because it doesn’t have any solid evidence that can support Tee-Kai-Koa is a “devil” nevertheless, it is a claim of value because for them they believe in the superstition that this is a “devil”.
On the third paragraph of third page this provides slanting it because on how Henry Tukeman convincing Paul to be more eager when he told about the vast fortune awaiting for any man who could get this absolutely unique specimen of supposedly extinct fauna to the hands of taxidermists in civilization and made Paul to go with him in discovering the mammoth.
“Soon-thai’s object in climbing it had probably been to inspect some massive bones which projected from a ledge about fifty feet up.” there is a present of hedging because the author used vague statements that do not directly attempt to tackle an issue.
On the second paragraph of fifth page this statement provides a claim of policy,“Paul must have watched him coolly…”it because Henry Tukeman order Paul that he must watched the mammoth.

“ Finding this more than even his colossal strength could compass.” on this statement on second paragraph of sixth page the presence of hedging is in author used this modal auxiliary words to do not directly attempt to tackle an issue.
At the same page on the fourth page I could say there is a presence of reading between the lines it is on the statement, “A feeling of pity and shame crept over me as I watched the failing strength of this mighty prehistoric monarch whom I had outwitted and despoiled of a thousand peaceful years of harmless existence. It was as though I were robbing nature, and old Mother Earth herself of a child born on her younger days, in the dawn of time.” author used this statement to hide his true motive from the readers that he will kill the mammoth.
In general as reader I could say that the author Henry Tukeman is a great writer just like on hoSw he narrated and describe the setting, characters, and the events that happened. Nevertheless, there are some arguments and ideas that makes the readers confuse.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s