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.