I have found Jack London’s views very confusing and contradictory and i’m intrigued to read more. He’s a supposed socialist and marxist, but all i could see in this collection of stories is his obvious infatuation with Darwinism. It is a very interesting study made of how “civility” tames the wild and its contradictions, what’s nurture and what’s nature and how much nature can be controlled.
However what leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and the reason this isn’t a five, is the portrayal of the natives in his stories, blatantly inaccurate portrayal of their relationship to animals and the wolf in particular. He gives them an air of sadism that i can’t seem to wrap my head around. Also this fascination with the “superior gods” or the white man and his machines, tho told through the eyes of the dog, it does seem like a personal opinion of white superiority and an air of “survival of the fittest” comes through.
Now to review the different stories separately:
“Batârd” is a kind of fable, i don’t know what was happening in the 1800s and why french-canadians were portrayed to be such brutes, but this head to head between human and dog was enthralling.
“Call of the wild” felt like 12 years a slave, but for a dog. Loved the story, the ending was disappointing (the natives being the villains for no reason was too out of pocket)
“Love of life” is another fable like story, i think these shorts are my favourite of his.
“White Fang” felt like Uncle Tom’s Cabin, but for a dog. “To oppress the weak and obey the strong” seems to be White Fang’s main learned lesson, and it was indeed his best way to survival, also it is proven that dogs do tend to learn their master’s bigotry. I really liked the evolution of that story, from a group of men being hunted by wolves during famine season, to following the growth of one of their cubs and how nature, dogs and all kinds of humans treated him.
All in all, i liked his literary style, interesting observations, intrigued to see where his marxism shows through.