Today’s century is different from all other centuries in many ways, but the main being nature. Today people don’t worry about natures effects on us. We have science, technology, and shelter. Three things that save us from whatever nature decides to bring. Therefore nature is just something beautiful to look at through a camera and we don’t even consider nature being something that can decide our fate. But what if we didn’t have our technology, science, and shelter? Would nature be so kind? In Jack London’s stories “Law of Life” and “To Build a Fire”, London argues that nature as a force that doesn’t care about the laws that humanity has built. He writes nature so that it uses Charles Darwin’s natural selection and Herbert Spencer’s “survival …show more content…
Jack London spent a very large part of his young life in the arctic north, and returned to America a changed man. He was convinced that society and its modern conveniences had turned everyone unappreciative towards nature’s power and weak in general since they relied too much on science and technology. He felt that people needed to rediscover their natural animal instincts if they wished to remain strong and top of the food chain in the modern world. London read Darwin 's “On the Origin of Species” and Herbert Spencer’s Darwin- influenced “First Principles” many times and used this as a source to help him write his own stories. In an article about London’s life called, “Jack London and Evolution: From Spencer to Huxley” by Lawrence I. Berkove, he writes “A copy of Origin to Species was one of the few books London had with him in the Yukon.” Darwin had a major influence on London since Darwin is mentioned favorably in London’s letters many of times. The influence of evolution and Darwinism on London, and his personal life experiences, are what makes his stories so real. He understands the settings in “To Build a Fire” and “Law of Life” enough to be accurate when he uses imagery to describe it and to know what those settings mean for a human alone in them. Most of London’s stories take place in Yukon where he spent his time so this as well is what makes his stories so true. Another aspect of realism that London uses is the lack of romanticism in the characters fate. London doesn’t seem to care to please the reader and let his characters live. He doesn’t make Koskoosh in “Law of Life” fight off the wolves to try and survive, or make the man in “To Build a Fire” successfully build a fire, because in the real world, in these places, those things wouldn’t actually happen. London sticks to the truth of the fate of the characters in this setting which makes these stories have the
They say to “always be prepared for unexpected situations,” this represents the man in the short story “To Build a Fire” by Jack London. The man is unprepared because he does not
In conclusion, Jack London is most definitely not a nature faker since he does not give them human-like characteristics, has a vivid and crystal clear description, and doesn’t exaggerate . On that account, Jack London is a strong, believable writer who helps you picture the story and really live it. Furthermore, Jack London also describes everything and intelligently presents Buck in a good and attractive way. A smart writer is a writer that makes you want it, live it and love it, in which he definitely does. In the end, all people that doubt him are deeply mistaken as he is nowhere near a nature
Christopher McCandless had always admired the works of Jack London. He even went as far as naming Jack London “king”. McCandless relished the naturalisitc elements of London’s writings, elements that he chose to ignore in his own life. Jack London often depicted men as being controlled by their environment and being unable to withstand any heavy circumstances. He depicted themes about the frailty of man and man’s inability to overcome nature. But McCandless clearly did not take away any of the valuable lessons from these stories. He hailed London as “king” but never truly learned from London’s stories, dying in a tragically ironic way when he came to meet the same fate as the protagonist in Jack London’s “To Build a Fire”. Christopher McCandless
Throughout the Romanticism period, human’s connection with nature was explored as writers strove to find the benefits that humans receive through such interactions. Without such relationships, these authors found that certain aspects of life were missing or completely different. For example, certain authors found death a very frightening idea, but through the incorporation of man’s relationship with the natural world, readers find the immense utility that nature can potentially provide. Whether it’d be as solace, in the case of death, or as a place where one can find oneself in their own truest form, nature will nevertheless be a place where they themselves were derived from. Nature is where all humans originated,
Naturalism portrays humans' control over their actions and fate as limited and determined by the natural world, including their very humanity. The freedom described by Jean-Paul Sartre results in all individuals having the ability to make present choices independently. Despite the fatalism illustrated in naturalism, the characters in London's 'To Build a Fire' and Crane's 'The Open Boat' are ultimately responsible for their choices and consequences of their choices.
“Man masters nature not by force but by understanding. This is why science has succeeded where magic failed: because it has looked for no spell to cast over nature”. From the beginning of time man and nature has been in conflict with one another because, as a whole, there is no cooperating. Each one tirelessly wants its way. The Man is fighting for dominance and nature w never yielding its authority. In American Literature, many authors illustrate this theme in their writing. Specifically the writers Jack London in The Law Of Life, Stephen Crane The Open Boat and Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Fin. Each explores the relationship between humans and nature but with slightly different methods. Mark Twain uses nature in a realistic way, Jack London in a naturalistic way and Stephen Crane constitutes a combination of both.
Jack London writing technique influence his readers to consider Social Darwinist has an outlook on life. Merriam Webster’s explain Social Darwinist “to study of the human society, specifically a theory I human sociology that individuals or groups achieve advantages over others as the result of genetic or biological superiority. In class my classmates interpret it as “the survival of the fittest.” I agree with them, but I feel that you have to learn and gain from your mistakes. For example how could the strong survive without concurring adversity? London expresses it as, “And not only did he learn by experience, but instincts long dead becomes alive again. The domesticated generations fell from him. In vague ways he remembered back to the youth of the breed (page 40).
Jack London has written a classic short story in the 1908 version of "To Build a Fire." This is the classic story of man fighting nature. In most genres (e.g. movies, novels, short stories) the main character comes out on top, however unlikely that is. Jack London takes literary naturalism and shows the reader how unmerciful nature is. Much like Stephen Crane in "The Open Boat," in which the one of the characters dies, London doesn't buy into that "has to have a good ending" contrivance. Through analysis of two London's letters (to R.W. Gilder and Cloudesly Johns) these two versions of "To Build a Fire" come alive with new meaning. Although there are many differences on the surface, both stories use his philosophy as expressed to Johns and both teach a moral lesson, one which will not soon be forgotten: "Never travel alone."
John Burroughs accused Jack London for being a ‘’Nature Faker’’. Some Critics even said London animal hero’s are men in fur. There is an article about writers like him that was asked can any writer create a believable and compelling nonhuman character without being a nature faker? Why might Jack London have chosen to attempt this difficult technical feat and what is he trying to communicate to readers through his portrayal of Buck? Richard E. Miller called Jon Krakauer’s critique of London vehemence. Krakauer’s fury was for authors whose life and words don’t line up. Since Mc...
When Jack London wrote "To Build a Fire" he embraced the idea of naturalism because it mirrored the events of daily life. Naturalism showed how humans had to be wary at every corner because at anytime death could be there, waiting for them to make a mistake and forfeit their lives. He used naturalism, the most realistic literary movement, to show how violent and uncaring nature really is and how no matter what you do nature will always be there. London also presented the basic idea of Darwinism and the survival of the fittest, basically if you are dumb you will die. Collectively, London used naturalism to show how in life, humans can depend on nothing but themselves to survive. "To Build a Fire" is a short story that embodies the idea of naturalism and how, if one is not careful, nature will gain the upper hand and they will perish.
John Griffith London, who is considered by many to be America’s finest author, was born January 12, 1876 in San Francisco, California to an unmarried mother of a wealthy background, Flora Wellman. His father is thought to have been William Chaney, a Journalist, lawyer and major figure in the development of American Astrology. Because Flora was ill, an ex-slave, Virginia Prentiss, who would remain a major maternal influence during the boy’s childhood, raised Jack through infancy. Late in 1876, Flora married John London, a disabled Civil War veteran. The family moved to Oakland, where Jack completed grade school and would develop his love of the outdoors.
The external conflict of man against nature and the internal conflict of man against himself play a huge role in the whole story, leading to the fateful outcome of the man. The man fell victim to the struggles the conflicts presented, majorly impacting the story. "To Build a Fire" encompasses the idea of man becoming his own enemy and people remaining insignificant to forces of natures. The conflicts presented in the story embody the aspect of nature as an unstoppable, unpredictable, and powerful force that easily overtakes man. That thought shows how one man has little effect on nature, and in the end, does the most harm by subjecting oneself to nature's fury. The story, "To Build a Fire" by Jack London truly shows how weak an unprepared person compares to the unruly forces of nature.
Jack London brings man versus nature discussion into his story. The environment, however doesn't play against him for say, but does warn him from the very beginning. The audience can conclude that just like “the man” everyone is alone in the world - fighting for ourselves and the things we wish to acquire. The character created by London is isolated from the universe and fooli...
An Analysis of Jack London's To Build a Fire. In her cultural criticism of Jack London's "To Build a Fire", Jill Widdicombe explores the question of whether the story's protagonist might have perished from the extreme cold of the Klondike winter even if with a traveling companion. She describes the brutality of the winter weather and, alluding to the man's confidence in his ability to survive the weather, describes it as "behavior most of us can understand" - especially if we are accustomed to warmer surroundings. She states: "the extreme cold of frosty landscapes--or "The White Silence", as London describes it--is so quiet and abstract that it does not immediately appear to be lethal".
Karen Rhodes analyzed to build a fire in a cultural context. He believed "London's works were written so that he could survive in a world he increasingly came to see as "red in tooth and claw""(1). It is obviously the story of a man fighting the stresses of Nature. According to Rhodes, to build a fire was drawn from the year London spent in Canada's Yukon Territory. London depicted arctic and very cold conditions throughout the story. Rhodes believed to build a fire represented London's Naturalistic Flavor. "It pits one man alone against the overwhelming forces of nature"(Karen Rhodes, 1). He also believed to build a fire can either be interpreted as the Pioneer American experience or can be read as an allegory for the journey of human existence (Karen Rhodes, 1). According to Rhodes, there are two versions of to build a fire; the first one was written in 1902 while the second one was written in 1908. We are studying the 1908 version." It has come to be known as everyman trekking through the Naturalistic Universe"(Karen Rhodes, 1). To build a fire is indeed the story of a man trekking through the universe alone except for his dog. The man's death at the end was the culmination of the story. " His death came through no lapse of observation, no lack of diligence, no real folly but the nature of himself and his environment" (Karen Rhodes, 2). I think his is a fine criticism of London's to build a fire. London had made use of his life experiences in writing the story.