Wildness Of The Dog In Jack London's To Build A Fire
The theme of Jack London’s 1908 version of “To Build a Fire” is that nature is indifferent to the needs of man and his survival. In the 1908 version, a half-wolf dog was added into the literary work to further the plot and significance of the story, highlighting this central theme of existence. The addition of the dog in the revision helped emphasize the theme by representing the primitivity of nature and providing contrast. By combining these two elements, London asserts his understanding of the tragic and brutal relationship between man and nature.
The brutality and utter wildness of the dog represents the ferocity and unforgivable power that nature has over the man. Nature shapes the fate of humanity, and can quickly overcome “man’s frailty” …show more content…
The grating cold and bleak surroundings “made no impression on the man” (6) while the dog became “depressed by the tremendous cold” (7), painting the man as a figure unaware of the severe conditions, arrogant and daunting. He viewed the conditions as “cold and uncomfortable, and that was all” (6), which gave him a tough aspect of character. However, his “tough” qualities did not protect him from nature’s formidable power over his fate. These characteristics illustrate a contrast between the state of the man and the state of nature. The animal also provides a comparison of the ignorance of humans’ instinct in comparison to the animal who understands the ferocity of nature. The man was overconfident and underestimated strength and ability of his environment, while the dog recognized this, and the danger of it. Allowing the environment to kill the man indicates that his instincts were inferior to that of the dog’s, as the animal survived the same harsh surroundings of the brutal Yukon. “The brute had its instinct” (7) and “its instinct told it a truer tale than was told to the man” (7), because the man was “not much given to thinking”, displaying his obvious ignorance about the ways of nature and how the animal’s instincts trumped his own. Although the man was “keenly observant” (8), he was woefully inept at survival and
The brutality and utter wildness of the dog represents the ferocity and unforgivable power that nature has over the man. Nature shapes the fate of humanity, and can quickly overcome “man’s frailty” …show more content…
The grating cold and bleak surroundings “made no impression on the man” (6) while the dog became “depressed by the tremendous cold” (7), painting the man as a figure unaware of the severe conditions, arrogant and daunting. He viewed the conditions as “cold and uncomfortable, and that was all” (6), which gave him a tough aspect of character. However, his “tough” qualities did not protect him from nature’s formidable power over his fate. These characteristics illustrate a contrast between the state of the man and the state of nature. The animal also provides a comparison of the ignorance of humans’ instinct in comparison to the animal who understands the ferocity of nature. The man was overconfident and underestimated strength and ability of his environment, while the dog recognized this, and the danger of it. Allowing the environment to kill the man indicates that his instincts were inferior to that of the dog’s, as the animal survived the same harsh surroundings of the brutal Yukon. “The brute had its instinct” (7) and “its instinct told it a truer tale than was told to the man” (7), because the man was “not much given to thinking”, displaying his obvious ignorance about the ways of nature and how the animal’s instincts trumped his own. Although the man was “keenly observant” (8), he was woefully inept at survival and