Barry Lopez has dedicated his incredible career as a writer and thinker to exploring the confluence of nature and culture. Most of his fiction explores the subject through the lens of individuals, scientists and shamans and aesthetes, historical figures and travelers. Most of his non-fiction is place based, though the focus ranges from cities to islands to the entire Arctic.
Rather than offering his own viewpoint, then (though it is not concealed and certainly emerges throughout the book), Lopez offers a panoply of myths, stories, and perspectives. The stories told by modern science (remembering that the book was published in 1978) ground our exploration, and surely Lopez's readers as a rule couldn't accept another starting point. But while we tend to want to trust this body of knowledge, and Lopez doesn't slander its epistemology and potential, it is rather thin and unsatisfying. There simply hasn't been enough work done for a complete picture of wolf behavior and ecology to emerge.
But this is not why Lopez turns to other viewpoints. Native American mythology, hunters' tales, and Christian folk legend aren't inferior alternatives to science, though they are not treated as epistemological equals either. By presenting these four viewpoints on the wolf, Lopez investigates human imagination of the wolf, its social construction by these four distinct societies. With the wolf as a fixed point of reference, Lopez is able to compare and contrast the symbology and sentiment humans have historically mapped onto nature – the contrast between European and Native American cultures of course stand in stark contrast, while the contemporary viewpoint is in some ways even more distinct from its historical roots.
In each part, Lopez explores both stories and their roots and counterparts in economics, social movements, and actual ecology. Plains and Arctic Indian groups see wolves as counterparts, intelligent and skillful hunters who employ more or less the same tactics on the same prey, but manage to survive without the aid of technology. The idea of the wolf (and indeed many of the stories include spirit versions of animal species, concepts in many ways identical to Plato's Ideals) is called on to grant warriors its admired traits. Frontier hunters and rangemen made wolves a scapegoat for the manifold factors responsible for business downswings. Killing them was a tangible way for them to improve their fortunes, something they could respond to, unlike price drops and droughts. And it provided an easy, cheap way for politicians to placate the angry rancher lobby.
The last part focuses on medieval European folk tales about wolves. Compared to Native Americans, European stories show a conspicuous absence of actual wolves, a reflection of ecology but more so of modes of production and religious politics. The medieval compendium of knowledge about natural history, the physiologus, is full of folk remedies premised in religious allegory. It makes explicit what is now a post-modern revelation for young environmentalists: our ideas about nature are social projections, not Truth (a point Lopez makes subtly by placing scientific perspectives on the same playing field as the rest).
Beyond the physiologus, wolf stories in Europe were dominated by the werewolf. I didn't realize this, but apparently werewolves were burned and boiled to death as often as witches, if not more. Anticipating the fate of North America's wolves, they were treated as scapegoats for moral issues. Wolves, and their human counterparts, became icons for everything bad about humans. Their intelligence was acknowledged, was the premise for their place as the perfect sinner: wolves are smart enough to know it's wrong, yet they kill for pleasure and steal with abandon, with gluttony. They have an endless appetite not just for meat but for death and destruction in general. While most “werewolves” were men afflicted with epilepsy, autism, simple lack of socialization, or just being in the wrong place at the wrong time, some among the poor, desperate, and disenfranchised may have sought out the dark power of the werewolf, making a deal with the devil, etc, intentionally.
The thing I found most interesting about this, for better or worse, was its relevance to modern genre fic tropes. I saw in werewolf stories the missing piece that explained what the Sith are in Star Wars, and by extension, what villains and mooks in comic books and fantasy are in general. They are the legacy of the embattled Christian worldview. Christians in 1100s Europe didn't, couldn't, see wolves as just animals going about their lives as God made them, and much less could they see the poor and afflicted as people. The Sith, villains in general, are incarnations of evil, servants of the Devil, because they are stories about good conquering evil: reenacting the central drama of our culture is their ultimate raison d'etre.
The idea that this portrayal is psychologically lacking wouldn't have occurred to anyone until recently; only recently has the concept that the Devil employs servants to tempt Christians and introduce sin to the world begun dying out. While werewolves are mythological creatures projected onto a bunch of innocent scapegoats, an idea that serves to define a moral community, in fiction they are actually real things. Unlike the Devil and “Evil” in our world, the the dark side actually exists in Star Wars. The whole thing brought home to me more than I'd realized before – and I feel foolish at how stunningly apparent it is in retrospect – that modern good v. evil comic book fiction is an extension, optimistically the last dying gasps, of an obsolete worldview that has no place in a cosmopolitan, post-modern society. Which is kind of rough for me, cuz I love Star Wars :S