Within Call of the Wild, Where is Darwin's Mark?

As discussed in class, it is difficult to view this brief novella as anything other than a tale from a dog's point of view. However, as I was reading it for Monday, I noticed rather quickly that Darwinism did influence the text. I do not mean that term as a pejorative. I do not believe this book would have been written if it were not for the existence of the theory of Natural Selection and all that jazz.

What follows is an account of my observations of more subtler aspects of the tale of Buck. Firstly a non-Darwin related scene, I will start with page 62 of my editon (which unfortunately is a Harper-Collins DS cartridge), on this page it reads, "Buck wondered where they went, for they never came back; but the fear of the future was so strong upon him, and he was glad each time when he was not selected." This is happening as the man in the red sweater is selling off the dogs. The story is symbolic of 'death.' Yes, as throughout generations of humankind, we have wondered "where they went" in relation to the dead, and we 'fear' the unknown, not wanting to be 'selected.'

Now, to the meat and bones, I want to focus on Darwin's hand in this work. Firstly, I will point your attention to the text's language. In various places dehumanizing language is geared toward humans themselves. The best example comes at the end of chapter 2, when the narration refers to the gardener's wife and his 'divers copies of himself.' Wow, this language is quite strikingly Darwinian really, and also take away the warm feeling that the more appropriate word, "children" might have if inserted in lieu of London's choice of words.

Next, there is a striking passage which lasts 5 DS pages, but hopefully I can condense it. To me, its content is Natural Selectionesque, and exists only because of the author's awareness of the Origin of Species. In relation to Buck's first theft the author writes that it, "marked Buck as fit to survive in the hostile Northland environment. It marked his adaptability, his capacity to adjust adjust himself to changing conditions, the lack of which would have meant swift and terrible death.' This passage remarks on the idea of species having to adapt to meet their conditions, lest they perish. Now, this may not seem entirely Darwinian as of yet, but the London goes on to write that this 'marked, further, the decay...of his moral nature, a vain handicap in the ruthless struggle for existence.' Wow, I feel as if I had just been reading our Darwin texts, and so should you. As the passage goes on, London starts describing this "decivilising of Buck as "his development (or retrogression), as if humoring a reader by adding a contrary adjective to describe Buck is going through. Without a doubt, these passages come from years of the phrases 'survival of the fittest,' and 'natural selection' being harolded across the globe. By London's time, I'm sure that Darwinian thought has become as cultural as it is today.

I conclude here. I hope I have left the impression that I have read Darwinian thought into the text. Its there as clear as day in chapter 2 in the very least. Most of the previous paragraph was developed on that chapter.