Similarities Between Jack London And To Build A Fire By John Cheever

1592 Words4 Pages

The quality of limitless exploration is inherent in human nature. It can even be perceived as a form of challenging nature. In “To Build a Fire” by Jack London and “The Swimmer” by John Cheever, the authors explore the tendency of mankind to explore, thus challenging nature. However, the characters being human, are flawed and hinder themselves from accomplishing their goals. In “To Build a Fire” the protagonist attempts to trek the Alaskan wilderness by himself, but his arrogance paired with ignorance prevents him from being successful. In “The Swimmer”, the main character, Neddy Merrill, challenges nature by attempting to retain his childish youth despite his growing age. His childish mentality, alcoholism, and overconfidence prevent him …show more content…

As a chechaquo, or newcomer to the land, and this being his first winter, he should have listened to the advice of the old-timer at Sulphur Creek, who told him men should not travel without other men when the temperature is seventy-five below zero. When man is seemingly successful and boldly thinks, “Those old-timers were rather womanish, some of them” (London 553). This shows that the man is trying to challenge nature simply by defying the word of more experienced men. In such harsh climates, men truly adapt to nature out of the necesitity to survive.By defying the word of an experienced traveler, the man is attempting to challenge nature by changing the ways men have adapted to it. Next, the man ignores his only traveling companion, a dog. While the man regards the dog to be inferior in every way, he overlooks a crucial piece of evidence- the dog is naturally suited to the environment. The dog’s survival instinct is shown to be of value when the man misjudges the temperature to be fifty below zero, a cold but normal temperature to be outside, when in reality it is seventy-five below zero, a temperature where travelling should not occur. London expresses the misguided superiority by stating, “This man did not know cold. Possibly all the generations of his ancestry had been ignorant …show more content…

When the man is cautioned by knowledgeable men about taking note of traveling alone in severely cold temperatures, the man blatantly ignores them. He thinks to himself, “Any man who was a man could travel alone” (553). This shows not only his ignorance to the harsh realities of an extreme climate but him as a highly critical character because he assumes the old-timer is not a “real man” since he suggested not to travel alone. Not only that, but the man carries his ignorance over the course of his journey. After swiftly creating a fire in a desperate situation, he thinks boldly “...the cold of space was outwitted” (551). He believes he has successfully overcome nature’s harshness by building one fire on his lengthy journey to the next camp. His bold thinking reveals the man’s arrogant character, which prevents him from being prosperous in the harsh climate. It lulls the man into a false sense of security where he believes he is unstoppable. However, like any man, he is not as strong as he believes himself to be. As the environment does its work, the bitter cold becomes even more dangerous, and the man is faced with a choice- he can keep fighting or give in to the sleepiness of death. At this point “...he sat up and entertained in his mind the conception of meeting death with dignity...Well, he was bound to freeze anyway, and he might as well take it

Open Document