What is the author's (Jack London) purpose for writing Call of the Wild?purpose/moral/theme (any of these are great!)

There is no better way to explain author intent than
through the use of the author's own words. Therefore, the following reasoning behind
London's purpose for writing Call of the Wild was best described in
another text of his.

As a side note, the controversy
between London and Roosevelt did not concern only his text Call of the
Wild. Roosevelt also had a problem with London's novel White
Fang. This was written about in an article published by the New
York Times on November 1, 1908 ("A Question of Bulldogs and
Fakers").

In "The Other Animals" in Revolution
and Other Essays, London describes his reasoning behind the novel. His answer
came as a reaction to the critical remarks made by both President Roosevelt and John
Burroughs when they accused him of being a "nature-faker". Here is what London stated
regarding his writing both Call of the Wild and White
Fang:

readability="20">

I have been guilty of writing two animal
stories—two books about dogs. The writing of these two stories, on my part, was in truth
a protest against the “humanizing” of animals, of which it seemed to me several “animal
writers” had been profoundly guilty. Time and again, and many times, in my narratives, I
wrote, speaking of my dog heroes: “He did not think these things; he merely did them,”
etc. And I did this repeatedly to the clogging of my narrative and in violation of my
artistic canons; and I did it in order to hammer into the average human understanding
that these dog-heroes of mine were not directed by abstract reasoning. Also, I
endeavored to make my stories in line with the facts of evolution; I hewed them to the
mark set by scientific research, and awoke, one day, to find myself bundled neck and
crop into the camp of the
nature-faker.

Not only was
London able to explain the purpose behind his texts, he was able to also address the
name-calling of Roosevelt.