The Bear

Though the central action of “The Bear” takes place in the late 1800s, many of the concerns Faulkner addresses would have been relevant at the time of the story’s publication in 1942. In addition to ongoing racial tensions associated with Jim Crow laws, the question of environmental conservation in the face of ever-expanding industry was growing more urgent with each passing year. Within this context, “The Bear” serves as a critique of the attitudes and assumptions underlying what Faulkner presents as the flawed, even cursed, legacy of the American South.

“The Bear” can be considered an example of psychological realism, since it demonstrates to readers not only what Isaac does, but why he does so. His development takes place within a coming-of-age framework (or bildungsroman), with little mention of his parents. Instead, Sam serves as a father figure to him as Isaac discovers the beauties and dangers of the forest. Isaac’s quest to find Old Ben requires him to gradually abandon the trappings of civilization, such as his gun and compass, which symbolizes and parallels his abandonment of ideological baggage as well.

By the time Lion appears, the narrator suggests that “[Isaac] should have hated and feared Lion” (198), as if to recognize the threat the dog poses to Old Ben, whom Isaac has no intention of killing. Isaac’s concern is not merely for the bear himself, but for what Old Ben represents: the primitive, natural world that is under threat of destruction from humanity. Isaac’s passive role as an observer during the climactic scene in which Old Ben is finally overpowered mirrors his role as an observer in the destruction of the wilderness later in the story and in life. Unlike Sam, his mentor, who loses his will to live after Old Ben’s death signals the end of the Big Bottom as they know it, Isaac must decide how to carry on in a changing world.

Faulkner goes to great lengths to illustrate how Isaac reasons through the difficult choices he faces in so doing. He includes a transcription of an extended dialogue between Isaac and McCaslin in which Isaac describes his purpose thus: “I’m trying to explain to the head of my family something which I have got to do which I don’t quite understand myself” (274). Isaac’s confusion and difficulty in articulating his reasoning for disowning his inheritance are manifest in the ambiguous and disjointed nature of this section in the text as it proceeds in a non-linear pattern, with nonstandard grammar: The words at the beginning of individual paragraphs are not capitalized, and the phrases that end paragraphs lack terminal punctuation, suggesting that the entire section is one connected train of thought. (Faulkner resumes standard punctuation in the subsequent section recounting Isaac’s return to the Big Bottom.) Faulkner also provides direct access to Isaac’s thoughts on occasion, as when Isaac recoils in horror, thinking “No No Not even him” (259), upon discovering his grandfather’s probable incest. By allowing readers to follow Isaac’s reasoning and reactions so intimately, Faulkner invites them to empathize with a character whose outward actions, devoid of psychological context, might appear more baffling than sensible. In context as one of several short stories in Go Down, Moses, the effect is even more pronounced, as Isaac is mentioned in other stories, where his actions are generally viewed as eccentric.

McCaslin’s verbal sparring with Isaac reveals him as a foil character to Isaac, or perhaps even more directly, to Sam, since both serve as father figures to Isaac. McCaslin exemplifies traditional views and attitudes, allowing Faulkner to consider and address counterpoints to Isaac’s argument. One point of disagreement between Isaac and McCaslin concerns race. Whereas McCaslin has a condescending attitude toward Black people, Isaac feels guilt at benefitting from a system that favors white male landowners. Even as he opposes McCaslin, however, Isaac recognizes the impossibility of fully distancing himself from the misdeeds of his ancestors: “even in escaping he was taking with him more of that evil and unregenerate old man […] than even he had feared” (280). While Isaac offers some financial reparations to Eunice’s descendants, he recognizes that the mere transfer of money is insufficient to either absolve him or to compensate those who were wronged.

Faulkner’s decision to end with Isaac’s visit to the woods just before the commencement of logging operations lends the story a poignant circularity and underscores the main themes. Ash’s insistence on a particular mealtime shows the minimal extent to which he, as a working-class Black man, can exercise power or influence. Still present in the forest are the magnificent creatures, including the snake, to whom Isaac attributes near-mythological influence and power. Moments of reverence are interrupted by and juxtaposed with the brazen foolishness of people who, like Boon, think they can claim ownership over nature.