Both texts show people interacting with animals and, to an extent, show that human contact with animals is necessary under certain circumstances. However, the level of human contact depicted differs, as does the way the writers have presented their ideas and perspectives. [Marking comment]
Both texts explore human interaction and connection with animals. [Marking comment] In Text 1, Adamson is working to return Elsa, a lioness he has raised from a cub, to the wild. The connection he feels with Elsa is evident in how comfortable he feels in having a lioness spending the “whole day” in the studio with him, and even sleeping with him in his tent, waking him “several times at night by ‘rubbing noses’ and sitting” on him. [Marking comment] The emotional attachment he feels is shown both by his closeness with the lioness, and in his desire to see her safely reintegrated back into the wild, as shown in the repetition of “still no signs” of her being in contact with wild lions. To do this, Adamson deliberately leaves Elsa in order to make her “more independent” and not mind “being left alone”. Similarly, in Text 2, the camera crew from the BBC’s Natural History Unit stepped in to “save some penguins from freezing to death with their chicks” and show their emotional connection to the animals because they were “moved to tears by the plight of one chick that died”. [Marking comment] They therefore dug a “ramp in the snow” that “allowed the surviving penguins to walk to safety”. The writer goes on to highlight that it is natural for humans to have emotional responses to the animals, especially in the context of filming wildlife documentaries, because they are “working with these animals for many months” and “couldn’t help being emotionally attached”.
However, in contrast to Adamson’s very close and personal connection to the lioness in Text 1, it is made clear by the writer in Text 2 that the camera crew’s actions are not the norm, and that human interference with animals in the wild can have “all sorts of consequences”. [Marking comment] The writer reinforces this using the triplet “you don’t interfere, you can’t interfere, you wouldn’t interfere” and emphasises that it would usually “be very dangerous to do”, both for the human and the animal.[Marking comment] The writer makes it clear that human contact is not encouraged by using several experts, such as Mike Gunton and Alastair Fothergill, who say that it is not advisable unless under exceptional circumstances. The actions of the camera crew are justified in this circumstance by the fact that they had no direct contact with the penguins, but just made “some cuts in the ice” which the birds could choose to use. Therefore, the animals are observed and have no direct contact with humans.
This is noticeably different to Text 1, as Adamson is deliberately in contact with Elsa, a rescue lion who is used to human interaction. Elsa demonstrates some domesticated qualities due to her time with humans, and Adamson speaks of her as though she were a child, saying that she gave him “a tremendous welcome”, she “behaved very well” and was “rather full of beans”. Adamson seeks out Elsa, as he “went to visit Elsa on the 14th”, whereas the camera crew in Text 2 were not intending to intervene, and normally would not intervene as this is the “golden rule of wildlife film-making”. [Marking comment]
Therefore, while both texts explore instances of human interaction and connection with animals, the interaction described in Text 1 is much more deliberate and close, even though Adamson is attempting to return Elsa to the wild. This is reflected in the fact that the text is written from a personal point of view, giving a very personal perspective on a human’s relationship with an animal, and the intended audience for this text was Adamson’s wife, who also had a close personal connection to the animal and an interest in her welfare. The human interaction described in Text 2 is deliberately minimal, as it is not the accepted way of behaving in those circumstances, and this sense of detachment is reflected in the third-person narrative perspective, the report-style writing and the inclusion of objectivity with the help of expert opinion. Text 2 is therefore more balanced and demonstrates a broader, more ethical, perspective. [Marking comment]
| 
