Why “To Build A Fire” should be in our syllabus “To Build A Fire” (1908) is an elegant short-story written by Jack London, a profound writer of all time and a person with a unique taste for stories. It is a story that deals with a man going on a journey during a very cold day and how he survives the situation. Published in 1908, the story become a sensation and is still famous among young bookworms. Its simplistic use of language and intriguing plot make it interesting and easier for younglings to read. Yet, this book isn’t included in the curriculum for ENC 1102. I wonder why. What does it take to be included in the syllabus for a college-level class? Interesting plot? Interesting elements? Underlying theme? Or implementation of literature-related
…show more content…
As he writes, “fifty degrees below zero was to him just precisely fifty degrees below zero. That there should be anything more to it than that was a thought that never entered his head”, London explains that the main character does not care about what surrounds him and tries to be the man who can do anything, in this case, taking a walk when the temperature is way below zero (London). This gives the reader an impression that the man (main character) is a person who would put himself at a higher level than others, thus portraying the character in a negative way from the beginning. There are very few stories that focus on the main character who is portrayed in a negative role, and “To Build A Fire” is one of the best examples that a student can refer to for a story with a negative main character. With a story where many exciting things happen, readers would expect to have richness in the tone, but London made the whole story bland-toned, meaning that the lines and words don’t express any emotion for the reader to absorb. In this instance, “but it didn 't matter much, after all. What were frosted cheeks? A bit painful, that was all; they were never serious”, London does not imply any emotions, but the interpretation of the line indirectly conveys the emotion to the reader (London). Not many authors take …show more content…
London repeatedly mentions that “the old-timer on Sulphur Creek had told him [main character] about it the previous fall, and now he was appreciating the advice” in different ways to show that the unnamed man regrets having not listened to the old man, whom he thought was “rather womanish” for thinking that it was dangerous for him (main character) to travel at that temperature (London). At the end, when the main character is barely hanging onto his life, he says to himself, “‘You were right, old hoss; you were right’”, accepting the truth that he should have listed to the old man at the village (London). This indirectly conveys the moral that people should listen and respect the elderly as they have experienced more than them and would be well educated from their life lessons, which most people at this time fail to
As he writes, “fifty degrees below zero was to him just precisely fifty degrees below zero. That there should be anything more to it than that was a thought that never entered his head”, London explains that the main character does not care about what surrounds him and tries to be the man who can do anything, in this case, taking a walk when the temperature is way below zero (London). This gives the reader an impression that the man (main character) is a person who would put himself at a higher level than others, thus portraying the character in a negative way from the beginning. There are very few stories that focus on the main character who is portrayed in a negative role, and “To Build A Fire” is one of the best examples that a student can refer to for a story with a negative main character. With a story where many exciting things happen, readers would expect to have richness in the tone, but London made the whole story bland-toned, meaning that the lines and words don’t express any emotion for the reader to absorb. In this instance, “but it didn 't matter much, after all. What were frosted cheeks? A bit painful, that was all; they were never serious”, London does not imply any emotions, but the interpretation of the line indirectly conveys the emotion to the reader (London). Not many authors take …show more content…
London repeatedly mentions that “the old-timer on Sulphur Creek had told him [main character] about it the previous fall, and now he was appreciating the advice” in different ways to show that the unnamed man regrets having not listened to the old man, whom he thought was “rather womanish” for thinking that it was dangerous for him (main character) to travel at that temperature (London). At the end, when the main character is barely hanging onto his life, he says to himself, “‘You were right, old hoss; you were right’”, accepting the truth that he should have listed to the old man at the village (London). This indirectly conveys the moral that people should listen and respect the elderly as they have experienced more than them and would be well educated from their life lessons, which most people at this time fail to