I remember reading Jack London in school and being amazed at the worlds he was writing about. He was never my favorite author, but he so vividly captured the subject he was writing about that you couldn't help but find it fascinating. I really like the fact that you include both biographical information and list other works from his bibliography beyond his couple of more famous stories.

In the second paragraph, you say, "I first read Jack London as a young lad in Berkeley, California." But in the third paragraph, you start with, "I first read Jack London's stories when I was traveling with my father and family across the US and Canada in 1967." There seems to be a little confusion here about where you first experienced reading these stories.

While I agree with the premise that you can still enjoy the narrative qualities of classic stories even if they contain problematic elements, I'm not sure the assertion that there's "nothing to be gained by focusing on those attributes of the story." In my experience, acknowledging concerns and problems is important, and it's often through the discussion of the quality of the work despite being written in "less enlightened times" that we're most often able to learn valuable lessons about the world and our place in it.

This essay did a great job of highlighting the exciting and interesting parts of Jack London's literary legacy, as well as pointing out some of the problematic elements of it. Through it all, your appreciation of his work shines through!