Reesman NeverTravelAlone 1997
Reesman NeverTravelAlone 1997
Reesman NeverTravelAlone 1997
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to American Literary Realism, 1870-1910
The afternoon wore on, and with the awe, born of the White
Silence, the voiceless travelers bent to their work. Nature has
many tricks wherewith she convinces man of his finity,?the
ceaseless flow of the tides, the fury of the storm, the shock of the
earthquake, the long roll of heaven's artillery,?but the most
tremendous, the most stupefying of all, is the White Silence. All
movement ceases, the sky clears, the heavens are as brass; the
slightest whisper seems sacrilege, and man becomes timid,
affrighted at the sound of his own voice. Sole speck of life jour
neying across the ghostly wastes of a dead world, he trembles at
his audacity, realizes that his is a maggot's life, nothing more.
Strange thoughts arise unsummoned, and the mystery of things
strives for utterance. And the fear of death, of God, of the uni
verse, comes over him,?the hope of the Resurrection and the
Life, the yearning for immortality, the vain striving of the impris
oned essence,?it is then, if ever, man walks alone with God.
-The Son of the Wolf (1900)1
Like the Whiteness of the Whale, the White Silence represents the
"dumb blankness" on the face of reality encountered by a writer as well as
his characters. In Jack London's famous "White Silence" passage, as else
where in his fiction, the immensity of the Silence of Nature occasions a
correspondingly powerful impulse on the part of London, his narrator, and
reader; though the travelers in the passage themselves remain bent and
33
voiceless, the narrator is not "affrighted at the sound of his own voice," but
allows "strange thoughts [to] arise unsummoned" in order to give utterance
to "the mystery of all things." The blankness coupled with multivalence
that thrilled Ishmael into speech has a similar effect here. London called
his reply to the White Silence "spirit-groping." And by the time of his last
story, "The Water Baby," he has his wise old fisherman, Kohokumu, speak
directly of seeking the truth that lies within, "from the deeps of me that
are as deep as the sea." Kohokumu tries to voice his sense of wonder at the
strange conjunctions of inner and outer realities:
same source will suffice. The headnote to the section on Jack London in
the Chelsea House Library of Literary Criticism concludes:
The three paragraphs that precede this one mention only a few of Lon
don's other words- The Road (1907), The Call of the Wild (1903), The Sea
Wolf (1904), and The People of the Abyss (1903)?and say almost nothing
about them, instead sensationalizing various aspects of his life.6 Although
this summary of Londons career does not exhibit the sort of emotional
attack one sometimes finds, it is fairly typical in what it stresses (Fascism,
raw meat, self-destruction). There is in the same volume, however, in one
of the excerpts of articles on Jack London, a fully realized assault:
London produced some of his richest and most challenging works, includ
ing The Star Rover (1915), The Red One (1918), and On the Makaloa Mat
(1919). Although the critical tide has turned in London's favor, and inter
est in his craft is replacing the biographical fascination, one still encoun
ters in headnotes to anthologies and elsewhere a need to see London?per
sonally?as a brute. We are still treated to critics who write Jack London's
life as the naturalist saga he never wrote, and then use that life story to
read the works he did write; thus has the autobiographical emphasis served
to draw attention away from the writing that was always the central activ
ity within his life. Portraying London as atavistic lone wolf, critics manu
facture and sell a version of Jack London that attempts to silence the mul
titude of beliefs in his work which, as Pizer would put it, "assert the value
of all life."8
Another revision of naturalism is going on, but unlike the revisions
of Pizer, et al., it has shed little light on London's work. Mark Seltzer's 1992
book Bodies and Machines, for example, typically objectifies authors, narra
tors, and characters instead of examining how these agents resist objecti
fication by the forces surrounding them. Seltzer and others are reviving the
limitations of a deterministic naturalism by describing its representation
of "bodies' instead of people, characterizing those bodies as "machines."
His book "traces the relays" between the natural and the technological that
make up what might be called "the American body-machine complex" in
which nature becomes a "naturalist machine" and human beings "statistical
persons.n He includes in his survey the "mass literature of boyhood, ado
lescence, and the making of men." He focuses for part of a chapter called
"The Love-Master" on "the best-selling wilding' stories of Jack London,"
bestowing upon his treatment of London a title he must have thought witty:
"Men in Furs."9
In "Men in Furs," we learn that in portraying the "violent confronta
tions" between the "life of motion and the threat of the cessation of life
and motion," London's work "reduces these conflicts to their most rudi
mentary forms." Life is "eating and being eaten" in "the great white male
North," and it is figured by the "miscegenation of the natural and the cul
tural ... apparent ... in the figure of the wolf-dog and other men in furs."
London's characters are merely moved around by the "dispassionate laws of
force" behind the "twin principles of gold and the machine.10 For example,
Seltzer finds that
The age in which London lived and wrote was the age of Dar
winism applied to society, of pragmatism and instrumentalism,
of Freud, of Veblen, of Henry Adams, of Marx, Jung, Pavlov,
Nietzsche. It is not surprising, therefore, that novelists like Lon
don, Norris and Dreiser display in their work a kind of eclecti
cism, seeming sometimes to be behaviorists, at others determin
ists, and at still other times almost neo-romanticists. Thus when
London is concerned for espousing conflicting and contradictory
ideas and causes, his judges are, unknowingly perhaps, charging
him with no greater error than being the representative of the
world in which he lived.16
But there is much more here than eclecticism: Numerous critics, includ
ing Earle Labor, Charles N. Watson, Jr., Jay Gurian, and Terry Whalen,
have underscored the profound dualities in London's thought, especially
his dialogic treatment of spirit and matter.17 As James G. Cooper has
pointed out, "London emerges as a classic case of the writer whose con
scious mind says one thing while the reader, using the writer's work as the
voice of his unconscious, hears just the opposite."18
Even in John Barleycorn, when London describes one possible response
to the White Silence, the White Logic brought on by alcoholism, as "the
antithesis of life, cruel and bleak as interstellar space, pulseless and frozen
as absolute zero, dazzling with the frost of irrefragable logic and unforget
table fact...,"19 the response is equivocal. Under the spell of the White
Logic we look at our fellow man as a mere "appearance" or "mirage," as
"brother ... to the dust, a cosmic joke, a sport of chemistry, a garmented
beast" (318-19), and at our own face that hides a nothingness that seems
the very core of our being:
But London's narrator enters into dialogue with this Noseless One, seek
ing to understand. He turns to his books as antidotes to hopelessness, even
though the Noseless One scoffs at them as "Boglights, vapors of mysticism,
psychic overtones, soul orgies, wailings among the shadows, weird gnosti
cisms, veils and tissues of words, gibbering subjectivisms, groupings and
maunderings, ontological fantasies," mere "phantasms of hope" that "fill
your bookshelves," the "sad wraiths of sad mad men and passionate rebels?
your Schopenhauers, your Strindbergs, your Tolstois and Nietzsches." The
White Logic would teach us that we may not understand anything of
enduring value in human life, or represent it in art: life is simply "unthink
able." "Come," the White Logic murmurs, "Your glass is empty. Fill and
forget" (329-30).
Every word London wrote was an attempt to combat the White Logic
and to reply to the White Silence; the belief in spirit (meaning) is in Lon
don's mind a belief first in himself and his efforts and second in humanity
as a vast community spanning time and space, artist and audience in Whit
man's "form union, plan." London's search for community took many forms,
among them socialism, racialism, and agrarianism; he never stopped
and the need to address the Other. "To Build a Fire" is a fine example. Crit
ics have mistakenly characterized this well-known tale as London's most
pessimistic story, one whose determination, as Lee Clark Mitchell has it,
makes the status of narrator and protagonist "of little or no concern" since
they are demonstrably not "card-carrying persons." Charles E. May goes
so far as to say that the story is a "naturalistic version of Everyman..., sim
ply Everyman as a body," and that London, "like his protagonist, is with
out imagination in this story, because he too is concerned here only with
the things of life and not with their significance.... [N]othing in the story
leads ... [the reader] to the metaphysical conjectural field of immortality
and man's place in the universe."23
Let us read the story anew. "To Build a Fire" operates on a grim con
trast between the kind of knowledge the unnamed hero possesses and the
kind he needs, a discrepancy that costs him his life. "To Build a Fire" shares
with "Bartleby the Scrivener," Moby-Dick, "The Blue Hotel," and "The
Open Boat" its symbolic power as well as the epistemological theme. From
the opening paragraph onward, the reader's imagination is invited to take
an active role; through a negative building of suspense, through ambigu
ity, allusion, and symbolism the narrator guides the reader along the jour
ney to knowledge the hero, in contrast, is unknowingly embarked upon.
London interweaves throughout the belief that finding a correct use of
knowledge elevates an individual to the fullest human potential. Attaining
knowledge alone will not lead to a higher quality of life, but the essential
elements of character teach how to use the knowledge gathered about life:
Knowledge without the wisdom to apply it as useless. This philosophy sur
vived all the intellectual conflicts that recurred throughout London's pro
fessional life. As he wrote to Anna Strunsky: "Mankind is my passion, and
in the search after potentiality and the realization thereof, my hobby."24
In 1907, while sailing from San Francisco to Hawaii on his boat, the
Snark, London completely revised and rewrote this story from the version
published in Youths Companion (1902) to the infinitely richer tale that
appeared in Century (1908) and then in Lost Face (1910). There is a sharp
discrepancy between narrative style and epistemology: The much briefer
1902 version presents a prescriptive, univocal knowledge by having the nar
rator simply state its moral, "Never travel alone," whereas the 1908 story
offers a very different hermeneutics. The reader's active role in the 1908
version works well with the key structural element lacking in the 1902 ver
sion: relationships between the man and the dog, the man and "the boys"
in the camp, the man and the old timer on Sulphur Creek. These rela
tionships deepen and complicate the theme of "man against nature" by
redefining nature as human nature. The story is about human beings in
nature and also in or out of community. Instead of a basic dichotomy
between simply knowing and not knowing how to survive, there are at least
three separate forms of "survival knowledge" presented, and all of them
the man has his "muzzle of ice" and "crystal beard" the color of amber from
the tobacco juice (69), speech is impossible, if there were anyone to talk to.
He does, however, return again and again to one figure, the old timer on
Sulphur Creek who warned him, "Never travel alone." In effect the old
timer is his companion, like the teller in the tale, sitting by his fire and
relating his Northland lore. Unlike the man, he does have imagination, and
whereas the temperature strikes the man as "uncomfortable," but "did not
lead him to meditate upon his frailty as a creature of temperature, and upon
man's frailty in general,... and from there it did not lead him to the con
jectural field of immortality and man's place in the universe" (64-65), the
old timer's wisdom must teach him otherwise. The man thinks, "Well, here
he was; he had the accident; he was alone; and he had saved himself.... All
a man had to do was to keep his head, and he was all right" (81). The point
is, of course, that his head is freezing! In using this particular image to
emphasize isolation?and in dwelling in the same passage upon the dis
tance between the man and his control of his hands and fingers?London
asks what is needed to compose identity. As the protagonist's body freezes,
so his consciousness eventually undergoes a change; he first thinks that "the
boys" will take care of him, but eventually, "He did not belong with him
self anymore, for even then he was out of himself, standing with the boys
and looking at himself in the snow. It certainly was cold, was his thought"
(97).
In the end, losing control of his senses, the man runs blindly, like "a
winged Mercury," unable to feel the ground (94). From this messenger of
the gods, he learns that he is at last a man among other men, for, when he
finally decides to "take it decently," his notion of propriety resembles a
social one. And with his "new-found peace of mind" comes a final vision
of the old timer "warm and comfortable, and smoking a pipe" (96-97). The
old timer had warned him, "one must not be too sure ofthingsn (76). Like the
man in the conclusion of the story, the reader is taught to see things in
relation to other things and accept the resulting epistemological contin
gencies: never to "travel alone."
Of the half-dozen times the protagonist thinks of the wise old man
on Sulphur Creek, all but once his specific thought is that the old man was
right. The old man represents the wisdom that the man on the trail lacks,
and his power is most clearly alluded to by the several kinds of fire that
accompany him: his warm fireside, his wreath of pipe smoke, his home at
a place called "Sulphur" Creek. He is also connected to the "stars that leaped
and danced" at the man's death, as the flame of the man's first fire earlier
"danced." Life = fire; death = cold. But fire also = knowledge, especially the
wisdom of the old timer, shared by the narrator and reader, listeners as we
are by the fireside. The vision of the old man replaces the hero's conscious
knowledge of his surroundings, and the man apologizes: '"You were right,
old hoss; you were right'" (97). This unbidden image with the statement
made in response to it is his last thought and his truest one. In spite of his
arrogant determination to travel his way, the man at last has not traveled
alone, if only in his dying moment. In this version of the story, no longer
is there a simple "moral"; rather, one encounters the assertion of a rela
tionship between Hero and Other, youth and old timer, and, in turn, of a
collective knowledge the narrator and reader share.
But the old timer's warning transcends the man's individual case and
takes on a mythic dimension, characteristic of London in that it grows out
of a naturalistic detail. Sulphur, or brimstone, is the stuff of hell, and after
the gold it is the "other" yellow mineral of the story. The burning brim
stone flares up in the man's nostrils as he lights his second fire (interest
ingly, when it happens, he immediately thinks, "The old timer on Sulphur
Creek was right..." [87]). Later, when he picks up the entire seventy sul
phur matches and scratches them against his leg, holding them until his
flesh burns, he can feel it "deep down below the surface" (88). Indeed, not
unlike the damned "below the surface" in hell, despite his efforts he is iso
lated from the community of the blessed awaiting him at the camp.
The ancients believed sulphur to be the father of the elements. A
telling reference occurs in Paradise Lost, where Mammon, one of the fallen
angels in hell, is the leader of a band of "pioneers" who dig into the sul
phuric earth for gold and other minerals from which to build Pandemo
nium:
The word "Mammon" in Syriac meant "wealth" and became familiar in the
New Testament through Matthew's use of it: "Thou canst not serve both
God and Mammon" (4:24). In Pandemonium, three plans are put forward:
Moloch desires war, Belial hopes to stay where they are "in peaceful sloth,"
and Mammon wants to build a rival kingdom, to
rather seek
Our own good from ourselves, and from our own
Live to ourselves, though in this vast recess,
Notes
1. Jack London, "The White Silence," in The Son of the Wolf($oston\ Houghton, Mifflin,
1900), pp. 6-7. Dates for all stories and novels cited in the text are first book publication,
unless noted.
2. London, "The Water Baby," in On the Makaloa Mat (New York: Macmillan, 1919),
p. 151.
3. Charmian London noted in her diary that her husband found himself deeply affected
by his reading of Psychology of the Unconscious by Carl Jung in the summer of 1916; one of the
passages he marked in his copy of the book was Jung's citation of these verses. Charmian copied
out Jung's citation, and she noted in her biography that London told of how this passage and
others in Psychology of the Unconscious affected him: "I tell you I am standing on the edge of
a world so new, so terrible, so wonderful, that I am almost afraid to look over into it" (Charmian
London, The Book of Jack London [New York: Century, 1921], II, 322-23).
wilderness, and calls his style "an index of his religious dimension as a writer who seeks to
unmask the face of the god behind the physical world he observes" with his "imaginative recep
tivity of mind" and sense of "agitated awe." London insists that those who are not alert to
"the mysterious presence of the physical worlds are ... limited, narrow and morally danger
ous" (pp. 133-35). For London, according to Watson, life was a "tragic paradox"; London's artis
tic "double vision" arose out of the clash of "high art and hackwork, illusion and reality, spirit
and flesh, life and death, being and nothingness" and energized his career. London scorned
supernaturalism but agreed with Spencer that an "adamantine line" was drawn between the
knowable and the unknowable: "Again and again he dramatized in his fiction those moments
of mystical rapture that permit one to burst the fetters of materiality...." (pp. 12,14-15).
18. James G. Cooper, "The Summit and the Abyss: Jack London's Moral Philosophy,"
Jack London Newsletter, 12 (January-April 1979), 24-27. One of London's favorite words was
protean, writes another critic, in which is implied "variety, change, multiplicity" to invoke a
universal response in the reader; such stories as "To Build a Fire" stress "basic elements and
their ramifying complexities" (Edwin Erbentraut, "The Protean Imperative," Jack London
Newsletter, 2 [May-August 1972], 153-56).
19. Jack London, John Barleycorn (New York: Century, 1913). Further references cited in
text.
20. Labor, Fifty Western Writers, pp. 272-73. One is reminded of B.F. Skinner's thesis
that "Without the help of a verbal community all behavior would be unconscious. Con
sciousness is a social product. It is not only not the special field of autonomous man, it is not
within the range of a solitary man" {Beyond Freedom and Dignity [New York, Knopf, 1971; rpt.
New York: Bantam, Vintage, 1972], p.183).
21. Scott L. Malcolmson, "The Inevitable White Man: Jack London's Endless Journey,"
Voice Literary Supplement, 1 February 1994, pp. 10-12.
22. Jack London, "Jack London By Myself," pamphlet quoted in Labor and Reesman,
Jack London: Revised Edition, p.16.
23. McClintock, p. 116; Lee Clark Mitchell, Determined Fictions: American Literary Nat
uralism (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1989), pp. 52-53; and Charles E. May, "'To Build
a Fire': Physical Fiction and Metaphysical Critics," Studies in Short Fiction, 15 (1978), 22-23.
May's comments represents a fallacy common among London's critics: he simply could not
have meant to achieve the effects he in fact does. McClintock believes that the Alaskan land
scape in general is "identified with a naturalist logic that denies human significance"; values
or "spirit-groping" must then be shown in the stories set there to be "the product of man,
himself, responding actively to the whisper calling to completion.... The external would be
actual and the internal the ideal" (pp. 50-51). But by the time of "To Build a Fire" (written
so much later than nearly all the other Klondike stories), the landscape "has become killer.
What remains for London to do in this story ... is to record the grotesque details which
describe the nightmare of impaired physical activity that is the prelude to the modern man's
death." London's protagonist is "merely helpless victim of the killing landscape, [and] the mys
tical light goes out of the Alaskan sky." The quest has been replaced by the "inexorable, exter
nal forces of natural and man's irrationality," and London "retreat[s] from the 'Unknown'"
(pp. 118-190). McClintock thus allows for no affirmative dimension in the story.
24. London, Letters, p. 137.
25. Jack London, "To Build a Fire," in Lost Face (New York: Macmillan, 1910), p. 63.
Further references cited in text.
26. Arnold Chapman, "Between Fire and Ice: A Theme in Jack London and Horacio
Quiroga," Symposium, 24 (Spring 1970), 20-24.
27. Toni Morrison, Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination (Cam
bridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1992; rpt. New York: Vintage, 1993), p. xii.
28. Ibid., p. 5.
29. Ibid., pp. 33-37.
30. Ibid., pp. 58-59. Images of whiteness in London's work may also be seen as signifiers
of sexual repression in a character?as in The Sea-Wolf where Wolf Larsen's white skin, as
observed by the protagonist Humphrey Van Weyden, represents both inarticulable desire and
a negation of complexities of all kinds.
31. As noted, nearly all of London's Yukon stories feature Indian characters and describe
the manifold problems arising from the white newcomers' racism and failure to adapt to the
Northland. Notable examples include "An Odyssey of the North" (1900), as well as aLi Wan,
the Fair" (1902), "The League of Old Men" (1902), and "The Wit of Porportuk" (1910). Race
remained a fundamental concept in London's thinking throughout his career, surfacing most
dramatically in his later Hawaiian and South Seas stories, where he examines racial and cul
tural collisions even more critically than in the Klondike fiction. Scott Malcolmson writes
that early on London, looking for categorical certainty beyond class, thought he had "found
one in an imaginary region at least as American as pitiless industrialism: race." As Malcolmson
further notes, London frequently makes "his heroes' whiteness, their understanding of it and
its requirements, the animating fact of their destinies." Whiteness is for his characters "an
inexplicable tribal imperative and a historical force." Race gave London "the possibility of a
world view unlike that of socialism, one which accommodated both firm collective identities
and human drama and tragedy on a global scale, without end. Life for London had to be a
struggle; and racism, racial conflict, was full of promise." Yet race ultimately did not quite
"deliver the happy marriage of individual and collective destiny" (Malcolmson, pp. 11-12). Thus
London's handling of race was always inconsistent; for example, his treatment of nonwhite
characters in works such as A Daughter of the Snows (1902) and Adventure (1911) is little different
from the stock racist attitudes of popular writers of his day. But on the other hand through
out his career he often makes nonwhite characters heroic in opposition to evil and grasping
white men, and the oppositions are treated with irony, pathos, and sometimes horror: in "The
Story of Jees Uck" (1904), "The Chinago" (1911), "Koolau the Leper" (1912), "The Red One"
(1918), and many others. For more discussion of London's contradictory ideas on race, see Earle
Labor, "Jack London's Pacific World," in Critical Essays on Jack London, ed. Jacqueline Tav
ernier-Courbin (Boston: G.K. Hall & Co., 1983), pp. 214ff; Watson, The Novels of Jack Lon
don, pp. 200ff; Susan Nuernberg, "The Call of Kind: Race in Jack London's Fiction" diss.
Univ. of Massachusetts, 1990; and Andrew J. Furer, "'The Strength of the Strong': (Reform
ing the self in Fin-de-siecle American Literature and Culture" diss. Univ. of California, Berke
ley, 1994), esp. chapter 5, "Man and Superman: The Construction of Contradiction in Jack
London's Social Thought."
32. Earle Labor and King Hendricks, "London's Twice-Told Tale," Studies in Short Fic
tion, 4 (1967), 335.
33. John Milton, Paradise Lost, ed. Scott Elledge (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1993).
Line references cited in text.
34. Franklin Walker, Jack London and the Klondike: The Genesis of an American Writer
(San Marino, CA: Huntington Library, 1978), p. 135.