I′m seriously acquitted for the article entitled “The Killing of Mammoth”. It is very hilarious, fascinated and very confusing. I guess the author forget to remind in his article or its relevant in future research. I can′t actually discovered myself and ask personally the author because I didn′t born at that time. What I′m going to critique is the data and fact related in the extinction of the Mammoth.
As what I criticize to this story in this method or strategy, I′m not in favor with it did and It’s to hilarious of what they are doing. And from the article, Henry Tukeman didn′t even provide his any background, What is his status in life?, and what kind of family they are.
Being a critical reader, when you put6 together your own knowledge to critique an article is really good, I f I′m not memorized even the place, time, and date taken in the event of The Killing of the Mammoth really fell confused.
From the article, you can give doubt to yourself that′s why does he make the article that in the first place he even stated that he no longer have rights in claiming that Mammoths specimen because he sold it already. He didn′t have think that suspiciously he made a wrong on his works is an epic fail in his whole life.
“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 society of the white residents of the efforts”. The state has the presence of bias because the author only indicates himself of being a “Hudson Bay man”.
“Once, many summer ago, me an Soon-thai, we go up the Porcupine River— Soon-thai is my son; he 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 and very high, and we cannot climb up it. We go back a little way, and we shoot a moose at the mouth of a little gully. Soon-thai, he goes off and he finds the gully ends in a little cliff, and he climbs up it, and finds a cave. He is brave, Soon-thai—he goes in the cave, and at the end is a small hole, and Soon-thai looks through it, an′ sees an easy way to climb up the mountain. There is a creak in the gully, which runs in the ground near the cave, but the water is bad”. This statement is bias also because the author focus the topic or focuses the topic to his son Soo-thai so this is a bias.
“I could not doubt for a moment that he was describing what he had really seen. “ He is throwing water over himself with his long nose, and his two teeth stand out before his head for ten gun-lengths, turned up, and shinning like a swan′s swing in the sun light”. This statement is hedging because the author uses auxiliary verbs that could support his vague statement which makes the reader to be confuse of what they are reading so it is hedging.
“Suddenly Soon-thai throws up his gun, and before I can stop him, he fires—- BOOM—- at Tee-Kai-Koa. Ah, the noise! It is cry like a thousand geese, only shriller and louder, and it fills the valley till it reaches to the mountains, and all the world seems to have nothing in it but the angry cry. As the gun smoke rises above the reeds, Tee-Kai-Koa sees it, and begins to run through the water towards it, and the noise of his splashing is as of all the wild fowl in the world rising from a calm lake at sunset”. Is likely to be hedging statement too because the author he is not sure because his said that world seem to have nothing in it but that angry cry on which he is not sure on his statement because he uses the word seems. So this is another hedging.
“On the nineteenth day after leaving Fort Yukon, we arrived at the mouth of the “ little river” describe by Joe, easily identify by a high sandy bank on the right hand. The high water in the porcupine had delayed us, and after the second day on the “little river” we were unable, even with utmost exertion, to make more than six or seven miles a day. Sometimes twice or thrice a day we would unload, to drag our boat over shallow all around log-jams, and on one occasion we had to portage everything a mile overland to avoid a canon”. This statement is hedging because the author used the word “would” because this word is example of auxiliary verbs.
“This cliff extended, as far as we could see, to the head of the river. Soon-thai’s object in climbing it had probably been to inspect some massive bones which projective from a ledge about fifty feet up”. This statement is another hedging because the author used the word “could” because this word is another example of auxiliary word.
It may be a fiction tale story. On the other hand, as what I think it’s hard to believe that mammoth still exists in the late 1800 in wherein scientists agreed that mammoth had extinct 4500 year ago. Even if that story is true, then why that mammoth is alone in that isolated area? Where is the parents or that mammoth have siblings? Moreover, I’s unrealistic that mammoth is alone in the first place.
Tukeman is a businessman, ha didn’t sell that mammoth to the public but rather this article. He wanted to be a known writer but his tools used is fail or merely the whole of his work is an epic fail.