While reading this story 'How to Build a Fire' I just kept thinking how stupid this man was to be out in 75 below freezing weather alone. Granted he had a dog, but even the dog was looking at him like he was completely nuts for continuing on his journey. And to go out alone was sheer stupidity.
There were elements in the story that I did like. For one I liked how London described the freezing of the beard. I could really visualize the tobacco stained beard growing with each spit from the man's mouth. Not a pretty picture, but still the visual effect was there. Another element I liked was that the man throughout the story seemed to refer back to the old timer. In the beginning he said that he laughed at the old timer for saying that no one should travel alone when the temperature is below 55 degrees. My thought...who would really want to be out in this type of weather anyway! He said this a couple of times in the story, which made me think that he was poking fun at the old time views and was not listening to the experienced voice of this man. This became obvious after he fell into the water and was quickly freezing. If he had been more experienced he would not have built his fire under the tree for the snow to fall on it and he most certainly would not have been out in the weather alone in the first place. In the end, he realized that he truly should have listened to the old timer and not laughed at him, because if he had he wouldn't have frozen to death!
I think the dog was significant in the story as well. There was a bit of reference to the dog's instincts, such as when he got his paws wet and was biting away the frozen water to prevent it's paws from freezing. The story said that the dog did not know or think, but that it was instinctual. Also the fact that the dog continually wanted to stop and be by the fire was another form of his instinct coming into play. I think London was trying to say that people really need to listen or pay attention to the way animals act, because they have better instincts than humans do.
In the end I think that London was trying to convey that mankind does not truly listen and that it is important to listen to those with more experience and to nature/animals, because one's life just might depend on this knowledge and instinctual behavior.
Amy, that's exactly right: the man feels himself superior to the old timer and indeed superior to his surroundings, as though he's able to triumph by his logic and reason. The dog's instinct was a surer guide, as the narrator says.
ReplyDeleteAmy, I agree that London was pointing out that animals have much more well-developed instincts than humans. People may be capable of conscious thought, but we have fewer instincts and we tend to ignore the few we have. As you mentioned, London says that the dog does not think, just acted instinctively. It’s almost as though the ability to think hinders the listening to instinct; thought allows humans to reason away instinctual warnings or perhaps to try and come up with a plan as the man foolishly thought he could run all the way to camp. The ability to have these thoughts – to foresee the potential outcome, panic, and try and formulate a response – gets in the way of the hardwired instinctual response that would actually save him.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I agree that the man was an idiot. Why he ever went out at all when it was that cold is beyond me, let alone why he did it alone.