THE TRUTH VS THE HOAX

By: Clarice G. Antatico

                     

                         

In somewhat 1890, there is a bizarre article that arouse. The piece was entitled, “The Killing of the Mammoth” by Henry Tukeman, which appeared in the October 1899 issue of McClure’s Magazine, a popular British general interest magazine of the day. As such, the article began with the letter penned by Horace Conradi that released Tukeman from his premise to keep the slaughter of what may have been called mammoth.

Although the story was entirely made up, many readers were still believed it to be true. Perhaps Tukeman’s realistic description of the scene made it sound real. However, when Henry Tukeman was given an offer by Mr. Conradi to secured the mammoth and keep the slaughter of the said specimen. With that, I disagree! Killing the life of a mammoth just for a money?! How rude it is to do such thing. In addition, the author had shown what kind of person is he. Are his claims legit? For example, in the beginning of the article, he claims that the remains of the mammoth were now reside in the Smithsonian museum. As I do research regarding in that statement, I found out that Smithsonian doesn’t have a mammoth skeleton. Also, I was confused because he didn’t introduce well who Mr. Condradi is. He also used his socioeconomic status to convinced us to agree with his claims. As he stated, “I poor man, found myself unable to refuse it” (referring to the offer of Mr. Conradi). Indeed, many readers will surely call him unpatriotic perhaps because of not telling his real purpose regarding the killing of the mammoth, aside of receiving money from Mr. Conradi. Also, because he is not honest with his self and to the people around him. Besides, in the second paragraph he stated some facts like “a small tribe of Indians living at Fort Yukon” “a clerk at the trading post, a private trader, and a missionary and his wife were only whites there in 1890, except when a rare visitor called from Circle City, a mining camp eighty miles up the Yukon River.”

As old Joe told the story about him and his son, there seems an error in it. There is a bias in that line, for he keeps on saying that his son, Soon-thai, is very brave. Opinion is also present in the article when the author said “the old Indian sat down and wiped his hand over his forehead and for fully ten minutes no words was spoken­ –he perhaps thinking of his dead son.” That line shows an opinion because the author had personal statement based on his knowledge of the facts. Later on the old Indian said “I am old an’ tired, an’ to talk of Soon-Thai, my son, makes me weak like a woman.” Again I was confused if Tee-Kai-Koa is an animal or place. Old Joe had stated “presently we hear a splashing in a lake which is beyond some willows; an’ there are no trees there; but we creep in very softly, an’ we come to the reeds, an’ wade through them to edge, up to our knees in the water. He is there, the Tee-Kai-Koa, standing on the other side of the little lake.” Then, Tukeman also stated “later I got Joe’s account of his return from the land of Tee-Kai-Koa. See? The author didn’t make it clear.

On the other hand, the author had claim fact, wherein he said, “In the tribe of Indians wintering at Fort Yukon was an active, intelligent young fellow named Paul, who spoke English well, and was always in demand during the summer months as pilot on the streamers of the A.C. Company.”

When Tukeman and his friend, Paul, got the idea of elephant-shooting, they both agreed and swore secrecy with each and journeyed to find such specimen. As they arrived at the mouth of the “little river” he’d stated his opinion in the said river saying that it was identified by a high, sandy bank on the right hand. “The gully was apparently nothing but a depression in the mountain-side, and it terminated in an abrupt declivity” this line was also an opinion.

 Some instances from the article that lead the reader to believe that scene had actually happened and that involves facts: “we found enormous footprints of the mammoth. On August the 29^th, we had our first sight of the mammoth. Tearing up great masses of lichenous moss and feeding as an elephant feeds.” The author is also right when he described the mammoth, “his long, thick hair, hanging down beneath his belly like a fringe, had effect of shortening considerably the appearance of his legs… thirty-one feet, nine inches away from the bases.”

I was annoyed when he, the author, narrated their experience and their plans during the hunting of the mammoth. Although, the author showed their sympathy as he stated, “a feeling of pity and shame crept over me as I watched the failing strength of this mighty prehistoric monarch.” He was still destroying the nature and the Mother Earth. In the next paragraph, it seems like they are too late to realized that they had killed enormothe us animal. I was so frustrated when the author uttered his opinion regarding the deed they’ve have done, “saving the skin, bones and every portion capable of preservation” for example. When they journeyed down the Tee-Kai-Koa River, there he met Mr. Conradi – and he kept the secret of the remnants of the mammoth. Furthermore, there he showed that his claims are true. Don’t get me wrong but he made his claims more believable, to be able to make the reader agreed with him.

Indeed, it was a fantastic tale. A tale that made everyone believe. With that, I do research because I was confused at the same time. According to McClure’s Magazine, Tukeman’s story was written as a work of fiction. Tales of living mammoth had popped up in newspapers here and there and Tukeman’s story was an imaginative extension of what so many reports hinted at. It had not been intended to deceive readers, but the “mammoth mania” soon deluged the magazine.

Yes. There was a truth in Tukeman’s story, though. Some claims of the author were indeed true and familiar.

However, as a critical reader you really have to criticize well and apply your knowledge of the premise of the arguments such as, bias, slanting, hedging, facts, opinions and so on, for you to make your argument also believable.

The Contradictor

By: Honey Rey P. Baclig

In my own understanding, based on the author Henry Tukeman in the story “The killing of the mammoth”, this story is the experience of the author on what are the strategies to the in order to gain money. As what I have criticized in this story, in this method or strategy. I am not infavor with its did’s and it’s too hilarious of what they are doing. If I’m not mistaken, I think this is the reason of the extinction of the mammoth and it’s too illegal. As what I have observed to the story, as a critical reader I observed hedging to this topic, hence it has many instances that are not sure. I am wondering that this article is true or not, thus according as what I have researched 4500 years ago the mammoth is already extinct, that is why they caught a mammoth before and they killed many mammoth? Is this story is old? Older than 4500 years? I think in that time it was no museum at all. 

They are killing mammoth and measuring the bones and exposed to the museum in order to gain money. They have many strategies in order to kill the mammoth, and I have observed also that their speaking method was weird and wrong grammar and I understand also if what they are going to imply.

Furthermore, I observed that this article was too advanced and more on technologies, I don’t think if why 4500 years ago, that stage was the homo sapiens are developing and the mammoth already extinct. Then this article it has already a museum in that time. Maybe I could also believe that they found only the specimen or fossils at this moment is, however at this article you will see that they actually killing the mammoth.

From the article, Tukeman didn’t even provide any background data profile. What is his status in life? Who really are his parents or what kind of family they are? Is he is literature or not? Is he is the authority to give trust? This ae some questions that are needed to be explain or answered so that the reader should not fascinated for this article.

Being a critical reader, when you put together your own knowledge to critique an article is really good. If I’m not mesmerized, even the date, place, and time taken in the event of the killing of the mammoth really fell confused. You just like believing a little child that he kills a herculean giant, if you also believe that he kill a herculean animal which had been said that it was extinct more than million years ago.

It’s a fictional story. Monopolizes our mind, I guess it is not the mammoth specimen he is going to sell, thus this article he wants this article to sold-out in the market sold-out in the market so that he can buy napkins or plate to his house so that her pretty wife will not get angry unto him. It’s marvelous, you drastically sell your own name, dignity or even your life just for a bunch of money.

From the article, you can give doubt to yourself if why does he make the article that in the first place he even started that he has no longer have rights in claiming that mammoth’s specimen, hence he sold it already. He didn’t have think that suspicious he made a mistake om his works is an epic fail in his whole life.

As a critical reader, I read in the other reference that this story is only a fantastic story only, and it developed by the fiction books organization. If you will read the article only without any references, you are attempting to believe to this story. Nevertheless, you are also fooling yourself believe in this false case.

He claimed the fact but it was not tested and proven, all about I read was all about the contradiction of Tukeman’s story, and it falls into a fiction story as what I have said a while ago. His way of strategies was he is making the story more fantastic so that the readers will also believe it.

It was fantastic tale. Tukeman had only seen a living mammoth but had brought it back for study. As he affirmed several times in his piece, the skeleton was now in the hands of the Smithson where it could be appreciated by some of the nation’s finest scientists. If only Tukeman’s story was true!

Well this is the proof, “Tukeman’s story was written as a work of fiction” according to the science blog. Tales of living mammoth but had popped up in newspapers here and there and Tukeman’s story was an imaginative extension of what so many reports hinted at. It had not been intended to deceive readers. But the “mammoth mania” soon deluge the magazine and the with letters concerning Tukeman’s story. As printed in a subsequent article meant to set readers straight on mammoths.

Did you ever notice that magazine was quite similar with the tale stories? Well this is a tale this story was imaginary happening only. If am going to tell you a question, do you agree with this statement? Did the story tell the truth? Specifically, this is not true at the very beginning and at the very first place even between the title of the story.

As a critical reader, as what I have read in wild life in the internet, the mammoth was extinct by only the changing of the weather and the generation today, not the killing of the mammoth. I think this is not the experience of Tukeman this only the imagination and it has a proof, if you site in the other references and I finally get the point of it.

He only wrote it for the sake of money and to amazed the readers also. Your knowledge is too short if you are not a critical reader, try to broad your mind and practicing reading between the line. 

A Poor Argument

By: EJ Kyla Rose M. Valdez

Money: Is it enough to kill? Is it an acceptable reason to get the life that you didn’t give? Just for the sake of a dollar price?

The structure of the article was good. It is a narration of the experience of Henry Tukeman, the author. He actually gives a vivid description on the setting, of the character, and the flow of the story over all. Author does not just give description but take his readers to his world. He have done a great job on letting readers to imagine, and think about how the story flows. That would make them interested and eager to finish reading his article. However, upon reading this, as a critical one I had my own judgement on his piece entitled “The killing of the Mammoth”. Either it is a good morally and acceptable or if it is not.

The author actually seeks to know the hidden realities or what really happen about the history of the Ancient Indian. He wants to see the place where the story of him happened. If it really exist. Also to find out the reason why they was afraid of that place, the north, and of the “Tee-Kai-Koa” as they call. He wants to know the reason behind the fear and avoidance of people of the tribe on that place. And yet he succeeds. Which is a significant help for him to accomplish his task, which is to document the existence of such wonderful and rare species.

Tukeman proves that the smoke would really attract their target, the Mammoth. By doing a lot and tries an experiments which he refers to the story an Ancient Indian told. When he fired the pile of the woods intentionally and got the full attention of the enormous animal. The animal which shows excessive emotion such as a cry of fear and anger as seeing smoke, that once or before have feared not only him but also  other animals living there.

Reading his article, a reader may be convince that this kind of animal is dangerous, or considerable as evil one. That it is just right to kill them for experiments purposes, documentation, and display to a presidios museum for the people to see and admire of. To get money, to get up from being a poor man and to have a luxurious life. Readers may also accept the social status as a reason to do things or a choice to do either good or bad.

In general, I disagree with the author, with the idea of killing the mammoth although I think it is a licensed job. He was given the authority. That it is for the people of the public to be informed and educate about hidden realities. To dig up things not yet discovered. Because it is still not enough reason for me to kill.

The author fails to consider the fact that the law is strongly against of the killing of an extinct species. He also fails to consider those little ones that would read his article about the killing of the mammoth may leave their little mind a confusion, if it is really fine to kill animals just because of unacceptable reason. Just for the sake of one’s self. Also, to consider what would this article and what he have done cause to those who protects wild and those who love it.

Tukeman said “… that I, a poor man, found myself unable to refuse it.” If I would to criticize this kind of argument, I would consider this as an example of Slanting. Why? Simply because though we all know that poverty is now on its high level still, it is not enough reason for us to do certain things that we all know right from the start were wrong or against the law. He used his social status, being a poor man, as a defend tool. For his readers won’t ask why does he accepted such offer. He simply implies that the readers cannot blame him of doing so.

Also, first paragraph contains a claim of value. When he says “… found myself unable to refuse it.” He claims that such offer to him was something important and would be a great help for someone like him. We could also consider the fact that it is influenced by his preference or choice, with the accordance to his needs or should I say his ambition.

Refers to some of the paragraph, the old Indian shows Bias on telling his story to Tukeman. He would always say that his son, Soon-thai, was brave. He said; “Soon-thai is brave, plenty brave, an’ he says… But Soon-thai, he is brave, he says, ‘I will see this devil an’ if he is no bigger than a very big bear, I will shoot him from a tree, perhaps’. Oh, he was brave, my son­­- very brave.” He was consistent and repetitive of his argument.

 “He was doubly eager when I told him of the vast fortune awaiting any man who could get this absolutely unique specimen of supposedly extinct fauna to the hands of taxidermists in civilization.” In this point, Hukeman used slanting. He manipulates the mind of Paul. He was trying to be good despite of his bad purpose. Which made Paul, a man far from civilization believes and follow him to his journey on haunting the ‘Tee-Kai-Kao” as they call.

Hedging was also present in his text. He used vague statements that do not directly attempt to tackle an issue. He quotes, “Soon-thai’s object in climbing it had probably been to inspect some massive bones which projected from a ledge about fifty feet up.” He does not support his claim with a fact that Soon-thai’s intention was really to inspect those said bones. Ancient Indian did not mention about that thing at all.

Again, Bias is being observed on his article. As he stated that “As to Paul, I have never met his equal in any of my travels. He was strong, active , untiring, cheerful, and full of a native ingenuity which overcame obstacles as soon they appeared, while his courage, and his quite an absolute confidence in our ultimate success, acted as a nerve tonic to me when I found myself speculating whether we had too heavy an under taking on hand.” The author was consistent on his point.

Untested claim of him, such as smoke would attract and scare mammoth later on become a claim of fact. ”We lighted the first piece of rotten wood, and then ran back to the tree at our best speed, igniting the other pieces on our way, and a final one near our tree, into which we hastily climbed to watch the result of our experiment… I have heard the scream of an angry bull elephant, the roar of an African lion, and the savage, half-human cry of the great gorilla; but none of these compare with the awe-inspiring cry of a mammoth.” He prove his claim then.

In the later part, when Tukeman said that; “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.” It seems like he still tries to hide from his readers the truth that it is his will to kill that animal. He suggested that he was pity for the fate of it, which actually is the result of his ambitious dream.

    I, as a reader of today’s generation, could say that I’m amazed of the way he wrote the article. His signature style that were not on other writers, his way of descripting was admirable, his patient on writing and documenting experiences for the benefit of other. He was a good writer at all. However, there are these arguments, ideas, and points that were not essential on making an article reliable and convincing. Ideas that were against on mine, those I know were morally unacceptable and never been supported by facts that may convince me as a reader. A challenge to every aspiring writer. 

Ideas With It

By: Charlyn D. Barnachea

The article that I am going to criticize is entitled “The Killing of the Mammoth” the author in this article is Henry Tukeman. This article is composed of 7 pages that was all about on the killing of the mammoth.

The killing of the mammoth is the article that I’ve read that have a lot of implicit and explicit claims that made the reader confuse to the story. In the first paragraph the bias and slanting there caught my attention. “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.” It is bias because the statement only focuses to the background of himself in which Henry only states his life and his connection with Mr. Conradi without telling who is that man that could give him an offer that he could never refuse it. Also, the using of slanting they just monopolized the papers and magazines which the scientist are still quarrelling.

In 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, enabled me soon to become intimate with the tribe, though at the expense of losing the society of the white residents of the fort.” I could say that the speaker gives a lot of opinion and claim of fact in which he emphasizes that he is a “Hudson Bay man”.

In the next paragraph, the whole statement there is obviously focuses in one person and that person is Soon-thai the son of the writer that never took chance to describe other thing but only Soon-thai, Soon-thai, Soon-thai. In this article I have to use my imagination to describe the things and come up to the story which they stayed at the cave that is full of big bones, climb at the top of the mountain, and saw the big valley, also the high mountains with a snow that never goes away.

“The old man rose, and pointed before him. A strange glitter was in his eye, and the beads of perspiration stood out on his forehead. 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, an’ his two teeth stand out before his head for ten gun lengths, turned up an’ shining like a swan’s wing in the sunlight. His hair is black an’ long an’ hangs down his sides like driftweed from the tree branches after the floods, an’ his cabin beside him would be as a two-week bear cub beside its mother.  We do not speak, Soon-thai and I, but we look, an’ look; an’ the water he throws over his back runs in little rivers down his sides. Presently he lies down in the water, a’ the waves come through the reeds up to our armpits, so great is the splash. Then he gets up an’ shakes himself, an’ all is a mist like a rain storm around him.” This paragraph I could say that it is a hedging because this paragraph is not straight to the point in which there is many sayings that it could  not easy to understand by the person who is reading this article.

With this sentence “Do not seek Tee-Kai-Koa, white man lest you have no tale to tell us as I have told you.” And he stepped out into the clear, frosty night, living me wonder how he had divined my thoughts so accurately.” I could say that this is reading between the lines because of the hidden/implicit meaning that it is not written in this paragraph that it could be understandable when there are more meanings to write in this article.

“While in the valley they had seen the huge footprints of the mammoth, but never more than those of one animal, and always of the size, so that it seemed as if this prehistoric giant must be the last of his race alive there.” In this paragraph it is a claim of fact that they seen the footprint of the mammoth and the size of the mammoth also opinion that the prehistoric giant must be the last of the race alive. In the second paragraph at the third page there is untested claims also claim of value because of much of curiosity about Tee-Kai-Koa also the superstition of being a “devil”.

“Soon-thai’s object in climbing it had probably been to inspect some massive bones which projected from a ledge about fifty feet up.” In this sentence there is a hedging because of the word probably that they inspect the massive bones of the mammoth.

In the 5 page “Paul must have watched him very coolly…” In this statement, from the second paragraph this is a claim of policy because Henry Tukeman gives order on which Paul was watching the mammoth.

In line with this I read the article there are really a lot used of hedging that can use vague statement that do not directly attempt. “Finding this more the even his colossal strength could compass, he seized a top timber, a solid green long twenty-five feet long and over a foot in diameter, and threw it clear behind.” The word could there is my basis that this is a hedging.

“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.” In this sentence it is reading between the lines it is not really the point that the feeling is pity and shame crept over him.

            In general, I, as a reader I could say that I’m amazed of the way he wrote the article. Henry Tukeman signature style that were not on other writers, his way of descripting was admirable, his patient on writing and documenting experiences for the benefit of other. He was a good writer. However, there are these arguments, ideas, and points that were not essential on making an article reliable and convincing. Ideas that were against on mine, those I know were morally unacceptable and never been supported by facts that may convince me as a reader.

However, as a critical reader you really have to criticize well and apply your knowledge of the premise of the arguments such as, bias, slanting, hedging, facts, opinions and so on, for you to make your argument also believable.

THE JOURNEY OF HENRY TUKEMAN

(By: Yeltsin Rome E. Antiporda)

The story was about the journey of Henry Tukeman, who secured the specimen of the “Conradi Mammoth” in museum at Washington, U.S.A., in the story, he said that it was a big issue among continents and scientist during that time. He was also been tagged as unpatriotic because he prefer to give the specimen of the mammoth to the other country. As explained by him, he chose the bigger offer because he is just a poorman and he needs to make his dream in reality.

In the story, Henry Tukeman personally tells the story on how did he captured the Mammoth. In the story, it all begun an 1890 when he stayed at the Yukon he met the black people and become a family with them, sometimes he saw an old picture of an old Elephant and due to curiosity and to give humor to one of the old Indian men, he let them tell the tale of the animal.

Moreover he also narrates the way how they hunting animals in different rivers and valleys. It was a tragic parts on the animals mentioned in the story. And finally at the last part of the story He was able to narrate how did they killed the Mammoth.

With the story, I was able to think and ask if Mammoths are really existing. I was also curios on what really Mammoths looks like. With the use of technology, I was able to search about it. There are some claims that these animals are actually not existing. There are also claims that they were able to hunt Mammoths before but with the study conducted in Washington, it was proven that there is no found body of a mammoth and it was considered to be Hoax story.

To a simple student like me, I found the story very interesting, I found it very exciting because it opened me into another world of which is totally different from what we have especially here in our place. It also opened me to the creatures that almost of the people in the world haven’t seen those personally.

Technically the story is told in the first person point of view. The writer himself Henry Tukeman, narrates the story on how did he submits and capture a Mammoths.

The Characters were him, the Indian people he met, the animals they hunt and the scientists.

In the setting of the story, it uses the flash backing techniques where he started narrating on how he submits the specimen and he introduced the museum. He also describes the Rivers they crossed, the valleys they climb and the animals they have seen.

He ended the story with the narration nonhow the mammoth cried when they shoot it.

There are some conflicts that were present in the story. Man to man conflict where Henry Tukeman and scientist are arguing about the specimen if who will have it. Man versus himself. His struggle of being poor so he choose the higher offer. Man versus animals, told during the hunting of the animals.

About the author, according to the Smithsonian paleontology expert, Charles Schuchert in his press conference said and explained that Henry Tukeman was really an American short story writer. This means that this story could either be a product of his imagination. Either fiction or not, the story might interest the reader.

On the other hand, the story may not be friendly enough for the children. It may create fear, and disturbance of the mind of the children because it talks about the brutal killing of some animals even beast. Though hunting is the life of the people in the story, it may still not suitable for some reader who cannot relate about hunting. The story also may create negative impression and disappointments on some reader because of its being tragic in the ending.

The story somehow awakens the curiosity of the people in discovering new and ideas and discoveries.

In the Broader sense, the piece totally is a narrative story which may exercise the mind of the reader. It helps every reader to imagine things and creature beyond they can imagine. The piece may be good in the part of cognitive development but somehow negative on the part of the animal lovers and animal welfare advocates. The piece may promote immoral acts against animals and some creatures. I personally get hurt imagining how does a mammoth died in the arms of hunters. I cannot imagine animals running and jumping, looking for food and caring their family which suddenly killed by a human.

Technically the story was creatively told but sad to say it awakens the moral sense of being a human. It shows the hunger of the human for wealth, hunger for fame, hunger for foods, it also show the negative acts of human against animals. It tells us also that we human are the one who harms the creatures which are different from us. Either the creature is big or small we human should take care for them.

Lastly this piece should be used in a right occasion, right manner and careful sense. The piece might be critical for some students if this not might be explained clearly. It may promote violence to animals and disrespect to therelives.

But with the great teachers who might use the story as a part of improving the care of animals and other creature, it may be a good venue that will awaken the people it give respect and value the life on earth. The story or the piece will also be a great challenge for us youth to create new stories, stories that will bear no doubt to the reader by adding facts and evidences.

The story of Henry Tukeman, might be fiction and not true, it is still very good piece created by an intelligent man because it causes a lot of people to people to argue, discuss and study like what we are doing.

This story is an opinion because it is not true that there is a mammoth. And it have a bias because the author favoured himself and he` did not value the mammoth that they killed. It is also false claim because of the study conducted in Washington, it was proven that there is no found body of a mammoth and it was considered to be Hoax story. So it is false claim because the story have no solid evidence. And the story can be fall into slanting because the author committed an illegal doing which is killing an animal and this issue is not discussed in the story in fact, he focus his story to the hunting of animal but it have a same result he killed an animal. The author use a hedging word such as; probably.

‘MAMMOTHS ARE EXTINCT’

By; win right

The article “The Killing of the Mammoth by H. Tukeman” talks about how a group or tribe kill a mammoth by the collaboration of every person, how far did a person brave because it’s his son. Also, same goes to the eighth meets new tribes and new tales to tell about Tee-Kai-Koa or also known as “the devil’s footprint, how far did a person tried to find and kill a mammoth for fortune and lastly the secrecy that they kill a mammoth. However, different stories is not perfectly written depending on the author on how he/she can make the flow of the story, hence, different stories can also have flaws and making the reader not to easily understand it and that’s what makes it more interesting— suspense.

In the first paragraph the line “it was I Henry Tukeman, who secured the specimen of the ‘Conradi Mammoth’ as it has been called now in the Smithsonian museum, Washington U.S.A.,” can be as a claim of fact as it is not supported by further ideas and it can neither be true or false. “Many people will, undoubtedly, call me unpatriotic in thus allowing a foreign country to obtain this wonderful specimen” this part of the paragraph is considered as the opinions of the author or the first person point of view.

“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” in the third part of the paragraph is called hedging wherein the author is making a clear stand on issue and it can also be a claim of fact because it can neither be true or false.

Fourth paragraph the line “ He is brave, Soon-thai” is a part wherein an informed opinion takes place thus it can also be a bias by the fact that the father favors his son and called him paragraph “Soon-thai is brave, plenty brave” maximum level of bias. “devil’s country, an’ I tell him it is the country called in Indian Tee-Kai-Koa or ‘the devil’s footprint’.” is an untested claim which can neither be true or false if supported by different evidences or researches.

In the fourteenth paragraph, “‘Suddenly Soon-thai throws up his gun, and before I can stop him, he fires-boom!’ ” Is a hedging statement from the word “can” and for making a clear stand for an issue.

Tee-Kai-Koa and a profound contempt for the superstition of its being a ‘devil’.” This statement is a form of an informed opinion for the author emphasizes that it has been its own idea or perception.

Twentieth paragraph; “‘we should go off together during the coming summer, and bag the mammoth’ ” is a form of hedging from the word “should” and by the fact that Paul made a stand. Twenty second paragraph “I shook old Joe cordially by the hand and promised to avoid ‘the devil’s footprint’” is a form of claim of value.

Also, in paragraph thirtieth wherein you can’t really say to whom the author is referring to and he’s somewhat manipulating the perception of the reader about the royal academy “His long, thick hair, hanging down beneath his belly like a fringe, had the effect of shortening considerably the appearance of his legs” and you can’t really understand the whole situation or the whole story in the paragraph, it only leads you nowhere, I quoted “it is idle for me to describe him closely, and I need only speak of the feeling of awe inspired by the sight of this stupendous beast” is an example of hedging.

Seen in thirty second paragraph “we had everything prepared, and we had but to prove the truth of my supposition, namely, that smoke would attack our quarry.” is an untested claim wherein the author needs more evidences to prove that the plan or what they had planned would work. While in thirty sixth paragraph, the author seems to not have to tackle directly about the issue of the mammoth to be captured due to the fact that they inserted the issue of Tee-Kai-Koa instead I think the author wants the characters plan to use Tee-Kai-Koa to scare the mammoth so that it’ll come to the direction where the trap is set only for the mammoth if it will work or triggered so that the mammoth will be captured.

In thirty seventh paragraph, the author did not indicated if who was attacking or screaming to the log-pile in the sentence “his enormous beneath it, he gave a mighty heave, and for a second lifted the whole mass of green logs”, making the reader confused if it is Tee-Kai-Koa or the mammoth that are making the “most appalling scream”. While in paragraph thirty eighth this line “I glanced at Paul, and saw him aiming and firing with a coolness that I envied” is a form of a bias, favoring only one person in a situation.

Making a clear stand happened in paragraph fortieth “but the end was drawing near, for the great brute” and manipulating the perception of every reader as to what the author say “a feeling of pity and shame crept over me as I watched the failing strength of this mighty prehistoric monarch”. In paragraph forty one, most of the happenings expressed on how did they catch or captured the mammoth and it can be false claims, thus, it can never happened in the real world. For the forty fifth paragraph, hedging happened because the author doesn’t want to tackle the issue on how they spent the rest of the dark winter days.

The story left me hanging if Tee-Kai-Koa was dead or not because after they kill the mammoth the author never tell what happened to the devil in the story. Nevertheless, as to what had been expected since the first paragraph, the author and Paul sold the specimen to Mr. Conradi with millions of dollars. And making the story far too advanced for some readers hence, it was a very nice story.