Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.81 AVERAGE
3.81 AVERAGE
In general, I enjoy nautical novels for their adventures and camaraderie. The Sea-Wolf brings things to whole new level of homo-eroticism and moral quandaries. Humphrey Van Weyden, a literary critic, is shipwrecked on his way to San Francisco. He is rescued by Captain Wolf Larsen, who refuses to bring him to shore, instead forcing him to join his crew, in order to make a man of Humphrey.
London has a lot of feelings about manliness, most of which are pretty objectionable to the 21st century reader. It's this obsession with manliness that leads to much of the homo-erotics though, because Humphrey just can't stop talking about how manly Wolf Larsen is. When he first meets him, Humphrey says his face
with large features and strong lines, of the square order, yet well filled out, was apparently massive at first sight; but as with the body, the massiveness seemed to vanish and a conviction grew of a tremendous and excessive mental or spiritual strength that lay beyond …
This follows a long description of Wolf's body, and he goes on to expand on his impressions of Wolf's face and to then talk about his eyes for a full paragraph,
eyes the could brood with hopeless sombreness of leaden skies; that could snap and crackle points of fire like those which sparkle from a whirling sword; that could grow chill as an arctic landscape, and yet again, could warm and soften and be all a-dance with love lights, intense and masculine, luring and compelling …
He keeps going. That's just an extract. Then, after having known Wolf for approximately twenty-four hours, during which time Wolf has kidnapped him, this occurs,
'I read immortality in your eyes,' I answered, dropping the 'sir' – an experiment, for I thought the intimacy of the conversation warranted it.
Steady on, Humphrey. Play your cards a little closer to your chest.
Their relationship develops over the next half of the book. Wolf is portrayed as a brutal, cruel man, who has no compassion, and, while interested in Humphrey's intellect, mainly keeps him around because Humphrey amuses Wolf. However, the tension between them simmers, and it doesn't just feel like the tension between unwilling sailor / captain. As Humphrey describes it, it was intimate, “if intimacy may be denoted to describe those relations which exist between master and man, or, better yet, between king and jester.”
I think it can, Humphrey. This is definitely not a good or healthy relationship. But it's FASCINATING. The gay continues when Humphrey sees Wolf naked for the first time,
Wolf Larsen was the man-type, the masculine, and almost a god in his perfectness. As he moved about or raised his arms the great muscles leapt and moved under the satiny skin. […] I could not take my eyes from him. I stood motionless, a roll of antiseptic cotton in my hand unwinding and spilling itself down to the floor.
I found this book so much more homo-erotic than other sea-faring novels I have read (and that's saying something) that I became curious about Jack London's own sexuality. I found this article in the New Yorker, which suggests Jack London was bisexual. At the time of writing, a “wolf” was slang for an older homeless man who took sexual favours from a younger man – and London has been homeless in his youth and would have been familiar with this. When London was older he had an intimate and sexually charged relationship with an Englishman, and during their relationship, London called himself wolf. So calling his model of masculine beauty Wolf was certainly a deliberate, and meaningful, choice, and not something London would have done unknowingly. Though it's hard to tell exactly from his biography, evidence suggests London was bisexual. It's hard to read the scenes between Wolf and Humphrey without finding a sexual undertone.
The novel goes on to include a poet, Maud Brewster, whom Humphrey eventually falls in love with. This eases the tension between Humphrey and Wolf, and its necessary for the narrative for Wolf, who is, essentially, a murderer and abuser, to get his comeuppance. Which is good, but London's views of women as fragile and tender, and in need of a masculine influence, are harder to stomach, as are his views of what is essentially masculine. The story is about Humphrey growing from being a “sissy” to a muscle-bound Alpha male – which as someone who has no objection to sissies, I hate.
But if you don't pay too much attention to this, The Sea-Wolf is a rollicking yarn, full of sexual tension, sailing and swearing, and I recommend it. It's not a good novel, exactly, but I enjoyed it more than anything I've read in a long time.
London has a lot of feelings about manliness, most of which are pretty objectionable to the 21st century reader. It's this obsession with manliness that leads to much of the homo-erotics though, because Humphrey just can't stop talking about how manly Wolf Larsen is. When he first meets him, Humphrey says his face
with large features and strong lines, of the square order, yet well filled out, was apparently massive at first sight; but as with the body, the massiveness seemed to vanish and a conviction grew of a tremendous and excessive mental or spiritual strength that lay beyond …
This follows a long description of Wolf's body, and he goes on to expand on his impressions of Wolf's face and to then talk about his eyes for a full paragraph,
eyes the could brood with hopeless sombreness of leaden skies; that could snap and crackle points of fire like those which sparkle from a whirling sword; that could grow chill as an arctic landscape, and yet again, could warm and soften and be all a-dance with love lights, intense and masculine, luring and compelling …
He keeps going. That's just an extract. Then, after having known Wolf for approximately twenty-four hours, during which time Wolf has kidnapped him, this occurs,
'I read immortality in your eyes,' I answered, dropping the 'sir' – an experiment, for I thought the intimacy of the conversation warranted it.
Steady on, Humphrey. Play your cards a little closer to your chest.
Their relationship develops over the next half of the book. Wolf is portrayed as a brutal, cruel man, who has no compassion, and, while interested in Humphrey's intellect, mainly keeps him around because Humphrey amuses Wolf. However, the tension between them simmers, and it doesn't just feel like the tension between unwilling sailor / captain. As Humphrey describes it, it was intimate, “if intimacy may be denoted to describe those relations which exist between master and man, or, better yet, between king and jester.”
I think it can, Humphrey. This is definitely not a good or healthy relationship. But it's FASCINATING. The gay continues when Humphrey sees Wolf naked for the first time,
Wolf Larsen was the man-type, the masculine, and almost a god in his perfectness. As he moved about or raised his arms the great muscles leapt and moved under the satiny skin. […] I could not take my eyes from him. I stood motionless, a roll of antiseptic cotton in my hand unwinding and spilling itself down to the floor.
I found this book so much more homo-erotic than other sea-faring novels I have read (and that's saying something) that I became curious about Jack London's own sexuality. I found this article in the New Yorker, which suggests Jack London was bisexual. At the time of writing, a “wolf” was slang for an older homeless man who took sexual favours from a younger man – and London has been homeless in his youth and would have been familiar with this. When London was older he had an intimate and sexually charged relationship with an Englishman, and during their relationship, London called himself wolf. So calling his model of masculine beauty Wolf was certainly a deliberate, and meaningful, choice, and not something London would have done unknowingly. Though it's hard to tell exactly from his biography, evidence suggests London was bisexual. It's hard to read the scenes between Wolf and Humphrey without finding a sexual undertone.
The novel goes on to include a poet, Maud Brewster, whom Humphrey eventually falls in love with. This eases the tension between Humphrey and Wolf, and its necessary for the narrative for Wolf, who is, essentially, a murderer and abuser, to get his comeuppance. Which is good, but London's views of women as fragile and tender, and in need of a masculine influence, are harder to stomach, as are his views of what is essentially masculine. The story is about Humphrey growing from being a “sissy” to a muscle-bound Alpha male – which as someone who has no objection to sissies, I hate.
But if you don't pay too much attention to this, The Sea-Wolf is a rollicking yarn, full of sexual tension, sailing and swearing, and I recommend it. It's not a good novel, exactly, but I enjoyed it more than anything I've read in a long time.
adventurous
dark
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal cruelty, Animal death, Body horror, Death, Misogyny, Physical abuse, Sexism, Sexual assault, Suicidal thoughts, Terminal illness, Torture, Violence, Medical trauma, Murder, Alcohol, Injury/Injury detail
adventurous
dark
inspiring
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I don't have a lot to say this time except that this one exceeded my expectations, considering it's a slow-burn adventure with descriptions aplenty about seafaring and ship maintenance. The writing and atmosphere was excellent, and the philosophical musings and tête-à-têtes were captivating, regardless of it being cynical for the most part. I thought he romance was also done well considering the time period it was written. The highlight of the book however was obviously the antagonist Wolf Larsen, one of the most compelling, spine-chilling villains I have ever read, and he didn't even do anything particularly gruesome, remaining dangerous and unpredictable till his slow, agonizing death. He induced such terror and anxiety every moment he appeared, and I shared that alongside the protagonist. The book slows down further around the second half, but the ending and the build-up to it was executed very well, which left me feeling melancholic and hopeful at once. Would recommend this to anyone who appreciates voyages and slow-burn books.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Animal cruelty, Physical abuse
Minor: Sexual assault
adventurous
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
This is a book I probably never would have read, except that I got a copy of it at a rummage sale a few years back. I love it when books like that end up being hidden gems. I feel as if Jack London had probably read [b:Moby-Dick or, The Whale|153747|Moby-Dick or, The Whale|Herman Melville|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327940656s/153747.jpg|2409320], because there are some definite basic similarities here. Man who is an outsider unused to the ways of the sea ends up on a long voyage and spends much of his time preoccupied with his unusual and dangerous captain. But Wolf Larsen is not exactly another Captain Ahab, and Humphrey van Weyden is (at least in my opinion) infinitely more interesting than the protagonist of that other certain sea voyage novel. In fact, although I was reminded of the earlier novel a lot, I found this book preferable. It flowed better, it kept me interested more, the philosophical and moral questions being posed gripped my attention.
And then as a bonus, I actually enjoyed the characters quite a bit. Humphrey and Maud's love story was compelling, because it was based so entirely in a survival instinct. They went from strangers to lovers all while fighting for survival and grappling with ethical questions concerning the sanctity of life, and it made for a wonderful story. I'd say my favorite parts of the novel are the long drawn out debates between van Weyden and Wolf Larsen, because they always went in such interesting and unique directions, and I never quite knew where each character would land.
That's all I've got - this was an unexpected treat. I read [b:The Call of the Wild|1852|The Call of the Wild|Jack London|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1452291694s/1852.jpg|3252320] a while back, and I thought it was just... fine. This book really increased my appreciation for the author's style and capacity. Jack London has a new fan.
And then as a bonus, I actually enjoyed the characters quite a bit. Humphrey and Maud's love story was compelling, because it was based so entirely in a survival instinct. They went from strangers to lovers all while fighting for survival and grappling with ethical questions concerning the sanctity of life, and it made for a wonderful story. I'd say my favorite parts of the novel are the long drawn out debates between van Weyden and Wolf Larsen, because they always went in such interesting and unique directions, and I never quite knew where each character would land.
That's all I've got - this was an unexpected treat. I read [b:The Call of the Wild|1852|The Call of the Wild|Jack London|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1452291694s/1852.jpg|3252320] a while back, and I thought it was just... fine. This book really increased my appreciation for the author's style and capacity. Jack London has a new fan.
adventurous
dark
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Excellent tale of a kidnapped man who truly discovers his manhood on a tumultuous time at sea.
adventurous
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I think I read The Call of the Wild as a kid and all I remember is dogs. Dogs are a pleasant memory. This book? Not so much. I wasn't invested in the protagonist nor did I find his mentor/enemy, the Embodiment of Toxic Masculinity, very compelling. This book had exactly one oman, and she was about what you'd expect.
I read this out loud to my husband, upon his request. I protested reading Jack London, but I caved in and gave it a shot. I thought maybe my bias against London was exaggerated and potentially undeserved.
Now I feel vindicated.
It started out well, with interesting personalities and a fish-out-of-water premise (a gentleman abducted into forced sailorship with a bunch of crass crewmen and a cruel and philosophical captain!).
It all amounted to a lot of nothing. We both got the impression that no one in the book liked the protagonist, at ALL. Understandably so. He learned to work on a boat, but never had any kind of arc. He didn't grow or change or become interesting. And neither did the captain, the pathologically nihilistic Sea Wolf.
This was a lot of words to spend on a story that didn't amount to much. Oh, the prose was good, if pretentious at times. That could be due to the insufferable perspective of the protagonist, which is giving the author the benefit of the doubt. It still wasn't much of a story.
I'll be resuming my break from London now.
Now I feel vindicated.
It started out well, with interesting personalities and a fish-out-of-water premise (a gentleman abducted into forced sailorship with a bunch of crass crewmen and a cruel and philosophical captain!).
It all amounted to a lot of nothing. We both got the impression that no one in the book liked the protagonist, at ALL. Understandably so. He learned to work on a boat, but never had any kind of arc. He didn't grow or change or become interesting. And neither did the captain, the pathologically nihilistic Sea Wolf.
This was a lot of words to spend on a story that didn't amount to much. Oh, the prose was good, if pretentious at times. That could be due to the insufferable perspective of the protagonist, which is giving the author the benefit of the doubt. It still wasn't much of a story.
I'll be resuming my break from London now.