Jack London's Call of the Wild the family dog Buck is taken from his rural home in the country and thrust into a life where he is forced to recover his primal, wild instincts in order to survive first in a dog sled team and then in the wild. London's purpose with the Call of the Wild was to be a response to a new form of animal story that had become highly popular. These stories were meant to call the reader to pay attention to the plight of animals, and many authors of this genre would use first person and describe how the animals saw things as either how science understood animals to see things, or blatantly treating the animals exactly like human characters in order to get us to identify with the animals more easily.
However, London was accused of being a 'Nature-faker' by John Burroughs and the president at the time, Teddy Roosevelt. They claimed that London's characters were too sentimental and anthropomorphic (Atlantic Monthly 298-310). London argued with these accusations and said in his answering essay that he'd written Call of the Wild in protest to the humanization of animals he said that his story was written as a protest to the 'humanizing' of animals and wrote that he wanted to show that his dog characters were not directed by abstract reasoning, but by instinct, sensation, emotion, but by simple reasoning. He also sought to make his story's go in line with evolution (London.)
I believe that London failed in his goals and ended up doing the same thing that he was protesting about though Buck at time is ruled by instinct his feelings while he acts out these instincts are put and shown in a very human life such as when he is describe to be 'laughing' when he was determined to take over the lead position after he killed the previous lead dog (Call of the wild 28.)
London, Jack. Call of the Wild. Stamford. Longmeadow Press, 1876-1916. Works Collection Book.
London, Jack. "The Other Animals"
"Real and Sham Natural History," Atlantic Monthly 91, 545 [March 1903]: 298-310.
