More handpicked essays just for you.
Literary analysis of "to build a fire
What are the five naturalistic themes in building a fire
Literary devices to build a fire
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Comparing the Two Versions of To Build a Fire "I am absolutely confident that beyond the motif itself, there is no similarity of treatment whatever" (544). Jack London, writing in December 1908, was responding to an inquiry from the Richard W. Gilder, editor of Century Magazine. Gilder, having just published "To Build a Fire" in his magazine, was worried when he came across another version published 6 years earlier. London's explanation was that the first story was for boys and the new one was for men; the only similarity being the motif itself. Through careful analysis of the two stories, in light of this letter to Gilder, and another letter to Cloudesly Johns, it is apparent that although London claims no similarities (besides the motif), they definitely exist. Before the similarities are discussed, it is necessary to look at the obvious differences that London explains are in the "treatment" (544). The 1902 version was published for boys, while the 1908 version was published for men. London explains that the motif was "not only very strong, but was very true" (ibid). It seems that he first published it for boys as a sort of educational story; teaching the youngsters about the dangers of the cold weather. Hence, after Tom Vincent learns his lesson, he makes it to camp and doesn't receive any serious damage. Later, London was worried that he had given the motif "inadequate treatment" (ibid). Therefore, he handled the motif again, this time for men, adding a dog for good measure. Since this story was meant for an older audience, topics could be brought up that weren't appropriate to be discussed in the first one: the man considered killing the dog and using his body for warmth. In addition, the most obviou... ... middle of paper ... ...story they are reading. 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."
During the March 1986 edition of the Journal of Modern Literature, Lee Clark Mitchell of Princeton University opens his article “‘Keeping His Head’: Repetition and Responsibility in London’s ‘To Build a Fire’” by critiquing naturalism’s style of storytelling. Mitchell claims naturalism as a slow, dull, and plain way of capturing an audience; and Jack London is the epitome of this description. Mitchell states, “[London’s] very methods of composition prompt a certain skepticism; the speed with which he wrote, his suspiciously childish plots…have all convinced readers to ignore the technical aspects of h...
London, Jack. "To Build a Fire, by Jack London." The World of Jack London 2012®. Web. 02
when in fact, he despises him and wishes death upon him. Claudius is not the
upon him that lead to him deciding to kill Duncan; who is his king. I
Peter Leithart in “The Serpent Now Wears the Crown: A Typological Reading of Hamlet,” considers the gravity of the main sin of offense of Claudius:
between the two of them. But I told him that becoming a King was more
Jack London’s “To Build a Fire” and John Updike’s “A&P” were very different, but interesting stories. Both authors chose a different approach to their chosen tone. Updike wrote in a more laid back and entertaining way, while London, on the other hand, chose to write in a more formal and serious way. The authors also developed much different characters. London’s main character was much older and rugged than the complicated teenage girls and grocery clerk that Updike chose to focus his story around. The most significant difference, however, is the choice of conflict. Updike’s conflict was a simple one focusing on man versus man, but London’s story had many conflicts that dealt with much more serious issues like, for example, life and death.
...e up the chance to kill Claudius himself because he would not get enough punishment that he deserved in the after life if he killed him then. Claudius would have to be a worthy adversary if Hamlet felt that he deserved to suffer also in the after life.
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.
“Every one sees what you appear to be, few really know what you are, and those few dare not oppose themselves to the opinion of the many, who have the majesty of the state to defend them.” - Nicolo Machiavelli, from The Prince Italian political theorist Nicolo Machiavelli speculated that the strongest leaders are ones who are able to carefully balance appearances to his benefit, strategically using them to strengthen his regime. If Machiavelli was indeed correct, then Claudius, from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, starts off as an ideal Machiavellian prince. However, as the play develops, Claudius’ loses his previously immovable command and composure, largely due to his concern over the potential threat posed by his stepson, Hamlet. At the beginning of the play, Claudius appears to have complete control over Elsinore, as evidenced by his imposing speech to the court: Therefore our sometime sister, now our queen, Th’ imperial jointress to this warlike state, Have we (as ‘twere with a defeated joy, With an auspicious and a dropping eye, With mirth in funeral and dirge in marriage, In equal scale weighing delight and dole) Taken to wife... [1.2: 8-14] In this scene, Claudius, who has only recently taken the throne after the death of his brother, addresses some pressing issues. Seeking to create a strong early impression, Claudius uses his words very carefully, taking great pains to both mourn his late brother and celebrate his marriage. Furthermore, with the words “imperial jointress to this warlike state” he justifies the potentially controversial union by making it appear like a benefit to the entire kingdom. Claudius is clearly a shrewd politician, for he deliberately emphasizes the contrast between his marriage and...
...let seemingly goes mad over. While the murder of Old Hamlet is in essence wrong, Claudius ends up as the more level-headed one, a distinctly better option considering Hamlet’s growing murderous craze. Hamlet’s dogged attempts at convincing himself and those around him of Claudius’ evil, end up being Claudius’ best moments. The audience doesn’t have just one view of Claudius; the other characters favorable ideas of Claudius as king and person lets them see the humanity, good and bad, in Claudius. An allegory for the human soul, Claudius is many things: a father, a brother, a husband, and a king. He like anyone else has to play the roles to the best of his ability, but is still very human and susceptible to the evils of human emotion ranging from concern to jealousy all which could have easily fueled his decisions.
In Jack London's short story "To Build a Fire" the reader watches a man's mental condition go from high to devastatingly low. At the first of the story, he is very self confident in his own abilities. This is evident by the way he keeps saying the he will be in camp by six.
In the story To Build a Fire by Jack London was a different but a pretty good story. Throughout the story there was many things that made to story go together and to creat a good story. I really enjoyed how the author foreshadowed things that were going to happen at the end but didn’t actually give the ending away. The author describes how cold it is and how nasty it is there and that made me enjoy the story more because then I could really imagine what was happening there. Overall I thought the story was really insightful and good.
The story I will be analyzing and evaluating in my essay is To Build A Fire by Jack London. Jack London was a man who struggled much early in his life and he drew upon those harsh experiences in his writing. Though his life had a difficult beginning, Jack aspired to make a better man of himself and after great tribulation made his mark as an incredible writer. The following is an analysis and evaluation of what I think is one of his more intriguing stories.
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.