Nature and nurture are two concepts that have long been pitted against each other in both literature and in real life. The predominant perspective has always been that either nature or nurture can thrive within a given context. This means that the two, in reality can hardly be considered to coexist; rather, they contradict one another a great part of the time both in literature and in life. The main purpose of this paper is to begin exploring the theme of nature versus nurture within the context of the two books Master and Man by Leo Tolstoy and The Call of the Wild by Jack London. The two books, published in 1895 and 1903 respectively, powerfully illustrate the themes of nature and nurture as they manifest themselves in different scenarios. This paper provides a comparative analysis of these two books from that given perspective. Essentially, in comparison of Master and Man and The Call of the Wild, it is evident that while nurture plays a vital role in the life circumstances that manifest in each protagonist’s life, in the end nature triumphs over nurture.
In the story, Master and Man, Vasily Andreyevich Brekhunov sets off on a journey with his servant, Nikita, to pursue a potentially lucrative business deal. Their journey is mostly characterized by hastiness and anxiety as Brekhunov is very apprehensive about the possibility of very likely losing the business deal to other businessmen. Throughout their journey together, Brekhunov is shown in the text to be somewhat obsessive over the time and as a result, he mostly forsakes all obstacles that are thrown in his way for the sole goal of reaching his destination in a timely fashion. It is notable for the context of this paper that his profound apprehension and extreme anxiety are a result of his nurturing as a businessman. Brekhunov is an extremely seasoned businessman. He is very adept at making money for himself and tends to exploit all possible means available to him in order to maximize his profits.
To further illustrate this point, it should be noted that in the book, the author mentions that Brekhunov even takes advantage of Nikita by paying him fifty percent less money than he deserves for his services. In Master and Man, the author writes: “In fact, Vassili allowed Nikita a wage, not of eight roubles a year- the true market value of such a workman – but of forty only” (Tolstoy 2). In the larger part of this story, nurture does seem to prevail. Brekhunov does not really seem to care about anyone or anything other than himself, his money, and his business. When the two characters face extremely harsh weather, Brekhunov takes care of himself while Nikita looks after his horse (Gustafson 199). In fact, Brekhunov’s business instinct is so potent that he leads Nikita and the horse into dangerous situations time after time just so that he can arrive at his destination on time. Gustafson (199) said: “Each time they chase after the image of Brekhunov’s desired goal, they get lost, often they find themselves back where they started”.
127 our experts are availableright now
In comparison, London demonstrates the potency of nurture in The Call of the Wild. Prior to his difficulties, Buck was a very pampered dog, despite his innate nature of being a wolf with wild instincts. He was very accustomed to a life of what would be considered ease and luxury for an animal in those times. Illustrating this point perfectly, the author writes: “Buck was neither house-dog nor kennel-dog. The whole realm was his. He plunged into the swimming tank or went hunting with the Judge’s sons” (London 6). When Buck is sold by the gardener’s assistant, he finds himself in a conundrum whereby he struggles to reconcile his nature as a wild beast and nurturing as essentially a pet.
Things are particularly difficult for Buck because he has been raised contrary to his nature for quite a long time. While he is a dog, he does not know how to survive in nature because of the aforementioned pampered lifestyle. He finds the cruelty of people and fellow animals to be very unfamiliar, unfair and quite intolerable. The author summarizes Buck’s situation by writing: “Buck’s first day on the Dyea beach was like a nightmare…he had been suddenly jerked from the heart of civilization and flung into the heart of things primordial” (London 15).
The story of Buck compares to the journey of Brekhunov because both these characters found themselves in situations whereby their nurturing was challenged in the face of nature. Brekhunov had always followed his business instincts against all odds, and despite any and all negative consequences. However, he found this difficult to accomplish in the face of opposition from nature in the most literal sense. Suddenly, Brekhunov began questioning his nurturing even though he still instinctively pursued it, creating a strange dichotomy where his nurturing made him react instinctually, replacing his natural instincts. Similarly, Buck was thrust into the harsh realities of nature when he was suddenly stripped from his luxurious life and sold into subjugation. He soon discovered that his nurturing had not prepared him for nature’s cruelty whatsoever (whether he actively considered this consciously is up for debate). Buck soon learned that to fight the exceedingly wicked nature of men and other animals, he had to tap into his inherent nature as well.
In Master and Man, nature triumphs over nurture in the end. Brekhunov spends the whole night obsessing about his business dealings and wondering when daylight will break so he can continue on his journey. His psychological state is so unstable that the author describes his mental state as being one of nervous panic. Brekhunov even convinced himself that it was morning despite knowing that there were still several hours left before dawn (Tolstoy 48). The author surmises Brekhunov’s thoughts by writing: “Because I devote my whole attention to business and work hard. I don’t sleep whole nights away. No. Blizzard or no blizzard, out I go if necessary and my business gets done” (Tolstoy 42). With this rambling, Brekhunov made the decision to leave Nikita behind and go on towards his destination. However, due to the impossibility of his task in the terrible weather being experienced at that time, he ended up at the same place where he began. It was then that he discovered that Nikita was, in fact, dying a slow death and not in fact sleeping.
This realization triggers an epiphany in Brekhunov. It is in this moment that nature overpowers nurture as Brekhunov instinct to preserve the life of a fellow human being, servant or not, emerges. The author writes: “He unhooked his belt, opened his fur coat, and pushed Nikita hastily into a straight posture, and lay upon him in such a way that the latter should be covered” (Tolstoy 58). Through this act, Brekhunov sacrificed his life for the life of his servant. His true nature as a human being emerges when he forsakes his obsessive ideas about business and shows love, empathy, and compassion towards his servant – a man he once viewed as lesser than himself due to his nurturing. Andrew Kaufman infers that nature for human beings is aligned with morality. He describes the entire story by writing: “Tolstoy does not celebrate life’s holism for its own sake, as he does in his earlier works. He does not discover in an imperfect world a higher poetic truth. Rather he extracts from the world clear moral maxims” (Kaufman 22).
The comparison with The Call of the Wild is readily apparent in the way Buck ultimately chooses to revert to his instinctual nature and thereby join the wolf pack. From the very beginning of his harrowing ordeal, Buck learned that if he was to survive, he would have to be vicious just like the world at large was shown to be. Given that he is by nature a ferocious beast, this meant that he would have to embrace his baser elements to combat the obvious brutality in the world that surrounded him. This realization enabled him to overcome all of the difficulties he had faced. He was able to defeat Spitz in a fight and become the leader of the pack. “Till now Buck had avoided trouble with his enemy, but this was too much. The beast in him roared. He sprang upon Spitz with a fury which surprised them both” (London 25). As the story progresses, it is evident that Buck becomes increasingly wilder and less of the pampered dog that he was nurtured to be throughout the first part of The Call of the Wild.
Southall (20) writes: “Buck had developed traits that posed a threat to Spitz such as strength, savagery, cunning, and patience”. This aligns with the inference of Bustard who mentions that Buck’s story can be described by the concept of naturalism. He says: “Naturalism is the concept that inside every person there is a primitive beast waiting to be released” (Bustard 1). It is, however, important to note that Buck does not forsake some of the aspects of his nurturing such as loyalty and compassion. He remains loyal to Thornton and chooses to stay with him rather than join a pack of wolves. Notably, despite Buck’s ultimate decision to remain with Thornton, London kills off Thornton’s character. In her book, Johnson suggests that this was London’s way of ensuring that Buck answers the “call of the wild” by ultimately joining the pack. Johnson states: “London seems to say in The Call of the Wild that nature points us to higher, spiritual truths’ (Johnson 21).
Essentially, in comparison of Master and Man and The Call of the Wild, it is evident that while nurture plays a vital role in the life circumstances that manifest in each protagonist’s life, in the end nature triumphs over nurture. The Call of the Wild and Master and Man both present a picture of nature and nurture in differing scenarios, and yet both books end in scenarios in which nature triumphs over nurture.
Both Buck and Brekhunov gave in to their natural instincts and in turn, forsook all that they had acquired through nurture during the course of their lives. It is important to mention that the authors of both books seemingly intended to depict nature as the most desirable and ideal solution in which any creature should exist. While this may not be, in all reality, the answer for real-life issues concerning man, nature and nurture have always been a debate and have been diametrically opposed to one another for as long as man has been writing about the two subjects. The books The Call of the Wild and Master and Man illustrate this perfectly.
