Who influenced you the most as a child? For some, maybe it was a parent or a sibling. Others, maybe a friend or a professional athlete. For Chris McCandless, the subject of Jon Krakauer’s popular article ”Death of an Innocent,” Leo Tolstoy and other like-minded writers influenced McCandless to push himself even to the point of death. On the surface, McCandless may have seemed admirable for his search for life’s meaning, but in reality, he was blinded by his own prideful foolishness. Attempting to find the meaning of life is a good thing to pursue, but there can be consequences if it becomes an obsession. The principles followed by McCandless led him down a slippery slope towards his demise. Krakauer described McCandless as “An extremely intense …show more content…
McCandless’ pride left his family in a state of grief and sorrow because he thought that taking risks only affected himself and not the people that care about him. Olav Ormseth, an Alaskan outdoorsman, comments on “Death of an Innocent” in Outside magazine, writing, “The real tragedy behind this story is what he left behind: grieving, bewildered family and friends. The hubris and narcissism with which he blindly launched into the wilderness are not things we can excuse.” McCandless believed that the privilege he enjoyed as a child negatively affected his ability to understand the meaning of life. This led him to change his identity and become a new person that was not affiliated with the old Chris McCandless. Ultimately, he ruined all of his relationships. McCandless did not tell his parents about his whereabouts yet told others he met on the road that he did not have supportive parents. He left his friends, family, and other people that cared about him to foolishly die alone in a bus in the middle of Alaska, and he is the only one to blame. Chris’s grieving mother said, “‘I just don’t understand why he had to take those kinds of chances,’ Billie protests through her tears. ‘I just don’t understand it at all’” (Krakauer 9). McCandless believed that the more idiotic chances he took, the more he would benefit from the experience. Furthermore, he would be able to brag about his …show more content…
The mixture of arrogance and overconfidence ultimately led to the death of Chris McCandless. Peter Christian, an Alaskan park ranger comments on the stupidity of McCandless and explains that “He spent very little time learning how to actually live in the wild. He arrived at the Stampede Trail without even a map of the area… A bag of rice and a sleeping bag do not constitute adequate gear and provisions for a long stay in the wild.” The stupidity that was circulating McCandless guided him to his grave. McCandless went into the Alaskan bush with no map, no tent, little food, and limited experience. McCandless had many opportunities to kill big game for food, but, due to moral concerns, he struggled to kill large animals. Without a map, McCandless was stranded in the middle of inhospitable terrain. Without experience, he let a perfectly good Caribou rot and go to waste. Without a tent, he called a bus home, which he ultimately crawled into and died. All in all, McCandless’s lack of experience in the art of the outdoors led to his passing. McCandless’s father, Walt, recollected on how “He was good at almost everything he ever tried, which made him supremely overconfident. If you attempted to talk him out of something, he wouldn’t argue. He’d just nod politely and then do exactly what he wanted” (Krakauer 8). During McCandless’s upbringing, he believed that
All three adventurers displayed their affection for the wilderness through how they lived after leaving society. After reaching Fairbanks, Alaska, McCandless set up his camp and began to live off the wildlife nearby. In his journal, he noted what he caught each day and showed his gratefulness through his writing font. He believed that “it [wildlife] was morally indefensible to waste any part of an animal that has been shot for food” (166). He tried his best to preserve the animals he shot for food, which in turn displayed his thoughts of nature as something precious.
When Jon Krakauer published a story about the death of a young man trekking into the Alaskan frontier in the January 1993 issue of Outside magazine, the audience’s response to Christopher McCandless’s story was overwhelming. Thousand of letters came flooding in as a response to the article. Despite the claims, especially from the native Alaskans, questioning McCandless’s mental stability and judgement, it soon becomes clear that McCandless was not just "another delusional visitor to the Alaskan frontier" (4). As Krakauer retells the life of Christopher McCandless and gives his own take on the controversy around McCandless’s death in Into The Wild, the reader also creates his own opinion on both McCandless and Krakauer’s argument. Krakauer
In the book Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer wrote about Christopher McCandless, a nature lover in search for independence, in a mysterious and hopeful experience. Even though Krakauer tells us McCandless was going to die from the beginning, he still gave him a chance for survival. As a reader I wanted McCandless to survive. In Into the Wild, Krakauer gave McCandless a unique perspective. He was a smart and unique person that wanted to be completely free from society. Krakauer included comments from people that said McCandless was crazy, and his death was his own mistake. However, Krakauer is able to make him seem like a brave person. The connections between other hikers and himself helped in the explanation of McCandless’s rational actions. Krakauer is able to make McCandless look like a normal person, but unique from this generation. In order for Krakauer to make Christopher McCandless not look like a crazy person, but a special person, I will analyze the persuading style that Krakauer used in Into the Wild that made us believe McCandless was a regular young adult.
Was Chris McCandless deranged? Was he delusional? Or was he a hero? Since Chris’ body was found in bus 142 in the middle of the Alaskan wilderness, he has been called many things. Those who knew him believed that he wasn’t crazy; that his impulsive actions and aspirations to explore the world, were no more than the natural inclinations of a young and idealistic spirit. However, his desire to venture into the unknown with no source of human contact and nothing but a ten-pound bag of rice, is not considered normal behavior. Jon Kraukauer’s, Into The Wild, manifests how Chris McCandless’ antisocial demeanor, lack of remorse, and impulsive actions are directly relatable to behaviors associated with a sociopath.
The author wrote this story in response to a magazine company, and eventually published it into a book. He used many styles and techniques to describe the life and death of McCandless. The mood throughout the novel constantly varies with the excitement of McCandless’s adventures and the emotions caused by his disappearance. Krakauer’s ability to engage multiple senses of a reader truly makes his novel special.
He took everything in his life to the extreme. As stated earlier, “It is hardly unusual for a young man to be drawn to a pursuit considered reckless by his elders; engaging in risky behavior is a rite of passage in our culture no less than in most others. Danger has always held a certain allure….”(Krakauer 182). People want to live while their young, therefore they take risks. However, what McCandless did was more than just risk taking. He contained something along the lines of an excessive hubris. ‘“He didn’t think the odds applied to him. We were always trying to pull him back from the edge,” vocalizes Walt McCandless (Krakauer 109). Trudging into the vast Alaskan wilderness without proper provisions is taking the extreme too far. As Krakauer states, “...[Chris] was fully aware when he entered the brush that he he had given himself a perilously slim margin for error” (182). Only someone with an extensive hubris would commit an act so dangerous and be confident in their survival. Although he lent himself to a handful of stupid mistakes, McCandless was far from an idiot. Even though the extreme he took his Alaska adventure to was ill-advised, there is something about Chris that is almost admirable. Many people have dreams and passions that get shoved into an old chest and are never to be visited again. In today’s society it seems as though everyone is
McCandless is a very independent person, a person with high hopes, that has a lot of courage, and is a very brave man for going out by himself in the wild of Alaska of the Stampede Trail. Chris McCandless had a lot of courage on going to Alaska by himself at a young age. While Chris was at any city or anybody’s house, he was ready to go to Alaska. But while he was there, close to the end of his life, he left a note on the back of the bus saying, “S.O.S I need your help. I am injured, near death, and too weak to hike out of here i am all alone, this is no joke. In the name of god, please remain to save me. I am out collecting berries close by and shall return by evening. Thank you, Chris McCandless. August?” Chris McCandless was by himself at the time. He shows his courage because while by himself, he went back out even though he was near death. He went out for food. Food for his health. That shows how much courage he had for his trip. Chris McCandless encouraged many young men to ...
In Jon Krakauer’s book Into the Wild, he documents the events that led up to the death of Chris McCandless. McCandless was a teenage boy who dealt with tremendous amounts of pressure from his parents to do well in school and keep family secrets — they apologized for it through buying him things that they thought he needed. However, Chris hated this and just wanted peace, and honesty at home. There was one place in which Chris could get this, and it is in nature — there was no chaos or dishonesty amongst his family. Before he would go to college, he would drive to unknown places on his own — cherishing the peace that he gets. And when he decides to go to Alaska, his journey leads him to
Living in the wilderness is difficult, but understanding the meaning of such lifestyle is even more difficult. One of the Christopher’s admirable qualities was that he was well aware of what he was doing. He knew about the difficulties and dangers that he would face into the wilderness, and was mentally prepared for that. Author Jon Krakauer says that “McCandless was green, and he overestimated his resilience, but he was sufficiently skilled to last for sixteen weeks on little more than his wits and ten pounds of rice. And he was fully aware when he entered the bush that he had given himself a perilously slim margin for error. He knew precisely what was at stake” (182). McCandless was an educated youth, who loved nature and dreamed of living in the Alaskan wilderness. Although he ignored to take many necessary things with him on this
McCandless set out for this adventure because of his anger, therefore he did not actually sit and rationalize his plan. He did not have food, water, hunting supplies, clothing to keep him warm. His death was an accident of not being prepared for nature’s harshness. Krakauer also explains that McCandless’s death was an unplanned accident. Krakauer compared his young adulthood story to McCandless stating what his suspicions were of his death, his theory is based off of the letters McCandless left behind. Their adventure stories are very similar, they both were caught in a life or death situation, the tragedy is that McCandless’s did not have as happy of an ending as Jon Krakauer. Krakauer explains that it was a matter of chance that McCandless did not survive. He also explains that they were similarly affected by their relationships with their fathers. Their stories are also very similar with their father, they were both
In 1992, Christopher McCandless set off on an odyssey into the backcountry of Alaska, an adventure that had proved fatal. After McCandless's corpse was found, Jon Krakauer wrote an article on the story of Chris McCandless, which was released in the January 1993 issue of Outside magazine. The article had received a negative response; several readers criticized McCandless for being foolish and ill-prepared, and showed no sympathy or remorse for his death. McCandless has been referred to as a nut, a kook, and a fool. However, McCandless was not a nonsensical man. In 1996, Jon Krakauer's novel, Into the Wild, was published. The novel uncovers more detail of McCandless's story. Into the Wild rebuts the idea of McCandless being someone who is foolish, and speaks of the many occasions where McCandless has demonstrated great perseverance and determination. The novel also proves the intelligence of McCandless, and brings insight into McCandless's psyche. The following examples will illustrate how McCandless was not a fool, but someone to admire.
Chris McCandless was still just a young man when he decided to drastically alter his life through the form of a child’s foolishness. However, Chris had not known at the time just how powerful his testimony against his father’s authority, society, or maybe even his own lifestyle was going to be revolutionary throughout not only Alaska,not even the lower 48, but the world. The story of Chris McCandless is a much talked about debate on topics of safety and preparedness in the wild, these things forever associated with the boy who was a little too eager for a death wish. Today, Chris is remember as a fool or a hero. The fool, a boy who allowed himself to be drowned in a fictional world inspired by his readings,dying because he ignored he was just a normal human being or the hero who set out to become something more.
The author skillfully uses literary techniques to convey his purpose of giving life to a man on an extraordinary path that led to his eventual demise and truthfully telling the somber story of Christopher McCandless. Krakauer enhances the story by using irony to establish Chris’s unique personality. The author also uses Characterization the give details about Chris’s lifestyle and his choices that affect his journey. Another literary element Krakauer uses is theme. The many themes in the story attract a diverse audience. Krakauer’s telling is world famous for being the truest, and most heart-felt account of Christopher McCandless’s life. The use of literary techniques including irony, characterization and theme help convey the authors purpose and enhance Into The Wild.
Into the Wild, written by John Krakauer tells of a young man named Chris McCandless who 1deserted his college degree and all his worldly possessions in favor of a primitive transient life in the wilderness. Krakauer first told the story of Chris in an article in Outside Magazine, but went on to write a thorough book, which encompasses his life in the hopes to explain what caused him to venture off alone into the wild. McCandless’ story soon became a national phenomenon, and had many people questioning why a “young man from a well-to-do East Coast family [would] hitchhike to Alaska” (Krakauer i). Chris comes from an affluent household and has parents that strived to create a desirable life for him and his sister. As Chris grows up, he becomes more and more disturbed by society’s ideals and the control they have on everyday life. He made a point of spiting his parents and the lifestyle they lived. This sense of unhappiness continues to build until after Chris has graduated college and decided to leave everything behind for the Alaskan wilderness. Knowing very little about how to survive in the wild, Chris ventures off on his adventure in a state of naïveté. It is obvious that he possessed monumental potential that was wasted on romanticized ideals and a lack of wisdom. Christopher McCandless is a unique and talented young man, but his selfish and ultimately complacent attitude towards life and his successes led to his demise.
Usually when someone is murdered, people expect the murderer to feel culpable. This though, is not the case in war. When in war, a soldier is taught that the enemy deserves to die, for no other reason than that they are the nation’s enemy. When Tim O’Brien kills a man during the Vietnam War, he is shocked that the man is not the buff, wicked, and terrifying enemy he was expecting. This realization overwhelms him in guilt. O’Brien’s guilt has him so fixated on the life of his victim that his own presence in the story—as protagonist and narrator—fades to the black. Since he doesn’t use the first person to explain his guilt and confusion, he negotiates his feelings by operating in fantasy—by imagining an entire life for his victim, from his boyhood and his family to his feeling about the war and about the Americans. In The Man I Killed, Tim O’Brien explores the truth of The Vietnam War by vividly describing the dead body and the imagined life of the man he has killed to question the morality of killing in a war that seems to have no point to him.