The writer of the article describes the area where Loch Ness is situated as very beautiful. The writer, obviously, is trying to make people come to Loch Ness. By making it sound pretty, it will attract more people. People may not come just to see the monster, they may be looking for other qualities such as scenery, so the writer produces those temptations to visit Loch Ness, here. The writer says the castle is ‘picturesquely situated in the Scottish Highlands’. This creates the picture in your head already of a great location.
The writer says that Loch Ness is the largest freshwater lake in Scotland. Another reason to go. It’s the largest, there’s none other like it, the same with the Castle, being the largest again, that’s another reason to visit the loch. The writer gives some historical information. The writer says that Loch Ness was formed ‘some 300 to 400 million years ago’. The thought of this to people thinking of coming to see something so old, will attract them more. The writer personifies the lake, saying it’s a ‘moody lake, subject to quick change.
One moment it is placid, the next it is abruptly beset by wind and wave’. This personification shows a kind of affection towards the lake, and makes it sound like seeing it is alike getting to know a great person. Saying it’s a ‘moody lake’ gives it all a feeling of mystery, of what could happen, when you see it. It makes it more interesting. After giving half-poetic and detailed descriptions of the situation, which would attract the people looking for scenery, the writer goes on to talk about the more well-known part of the Loch, the Monster.
Reiterating a little, most people will come to see if they can see the monster, but the writer has taken into account those who will also want to come because of the scenery. The writer provides something for everyone. The writer starts by telling the basics. The Loch Ness monster is formally known as ‘Nessiterras Rhombopteryx’but has been called ‘Nessie’ for more than 50 years. The showing of the large clever words for the monster shows immediately to the reader that the writer knows what they’re talking about, and what they say can be relied on.
The writer, before actually starting to give sightings and for and against theories, tells the reader that ‘there were no verified reports of sightings until 1933, although previously stories had circulated of a gigantic creature lurking in the depths of the loch’. The part about previous ‘stories’ of a ‘gigantic creature’, ‘lurking’, in the ‘depths’ of the loch gives a sense of the unknown. The words like ‘lurking in the depths’ show that although there is a lot known, there’s also a lot not known. This makes it a more interesting read.
The writer begins presenting the evidence with ‘In 1933, Nessie-sighting developed into a favourite pastime for travellers to the Highlands’. The writer clearly separates each piece of important evidence into paragraphs. The writer first tells of a famous picture. The writer goes on to say how ‘scientists agree it is an animal, at least one investigator has identified it as a bird’. Reading that tells you that there’s definitely something there, and most think it’s an animal, just like you’d like it to be. But saying that one investigator identified it as a bird shows some mystery in the whole business.
Making things not completely certain about it is what makes it interesting. It’s what makes people want to come, to find out for themselves, for sure. The writer goes on to give lots of evidence, not giving theories for or against it, but just giving the evidence, so the reader can take it in, and entirely make up their own mind. The writer then explains about LNIB (Loch Ness Investigation Bureau), and how it was created ‘with the purpose of researching the possibility of a large unidentified creature in Loch Ness’.
The writer then tells of how over ten years, LNIB has collected enough data to certify Nessie’s presence in the loch. This is the first time (the reader will think) that a specially set up bureau has said there’s definitely something there. It’s all very well with people sighting, but they could be lying. This is the first absolutely reliable source. The writer takes the opportunity to go on to give even more solid evidence, telling the reader about an underwater photo taken by LNIB, showing ‘what appears to be the hind quarter, flipper and portion of a tail, of a large aquatic animal’.
Before the reader can fully take this in, the writer also says that in October 1987, there was a sonar sweep of the loch. Nessie did not surface, but several ‘large targets were recorded, which could not be explained’. For one thing, the introduction of the word several, for the first time gives the possibility of there being more than one Nessie. This sudden new information grips the reader to read on. It then says that these ‘large targets’ could not be explained. This contrast between certainty and uncertainty has the reader pondering on what they know, and what they could know; what cold be true, what might be true.