Through journal entries, highlighted passages, stories of people’s encounters, and personal experiences, author Jon Krakauer attempts to reconstruct the life of a young transcendentalist man named Chris Johnson McCandless in the biographical novel Into the Wild. McCandless was a 24-year-old young man who completely severed his connection to the world, his family, and all of his tangible possessions in hope to survive off the land in Alaska. In the two years that led to his Alaskan Odyssey McCandless created a new life for himself and lived by the name Alexander Supertramp, in hope to leave his old life behind. Krakauer starts his novel “Into the Wild” by bluntly revealing to the audience that he had only survived 113 days and his remains were found two weeks after preceding his death. Rather than focusing on McCandless death, Krakauer focused on his life. Although Krakauer is biased, he proves to be a credible biographer and proves the assertions he made in his authors note.
Krakauer’s biased quickly becomes clear and many people criticize him for it. Contrary to what one might think, Krakauer’s bias gives him credibility because he openly admits to it in his authors note. He states, “I won’t claim to be an impartial biographer. McCandless’s strange tale struck a personal note that made a dispassionate rendering of the tragedy impossible.”(Author’s note). Krakauer is warning us from the start that he will include his input of Chris’s story as well because of his experience with a similar event. However, he does not do this to shine the light on himself, but rather to give the reader an insight of Chris’s experience. “ But let the reader be warned: I interrupt McCandless’s story with fragments of a narrative drawn from my own y...
... middle of paper ...
...ds contain a neurotoxin that can cause paralysis, he probably would have walked out of the wild in late August with no more difficulty than when he walked into the wild in April, and would still be alive today.”(194) Krakauer believes that the reason he did not make it out was because of his small mistake.
An argument that can be made about Krakauer reference to his own life is does not accurately reflect that of Chris’s, but just like many cases in the world they made assumptions in relation to others and found answers. One will never know exactly what happened since Chris is no longer alive to tell, but this is as good as it gets.
Even though Krakauer was biased and skewed the story to favor Chris McCandless he proves to be a credible author. He proves his assertions about Chris and gains credibility by admitting to his bias and collecting first hand information.
I agree with the author, John Krakauer, in the notion that Chris McCandless was not crazy
The epigraphs presented by Krakauer before each chapter of the memoir Into the Wild dive deep into the life of Chris McCandless before and after his journey into the Alaskan wilderness. They compare him to famous “coming of age characters” and specific ideas written by some of his favorite philosophers. These give the reader a stronger sense of who Chris was and why he made the decision to ultimately walk alone into the wild.
He also did not have a typical childhood, he witness his parent’s fighting and he also developed a poor relationship with his father. Krakauer was able to find important connections that helped him find the roots of McCandless’ rational actions. “The boy could not pardon the mistakes his father had made as a young man, and he was even less willing to pardon the attempt at concealment… But he did not confront his parents with what he knew, then or ever. He chose instead to make a secret of his dark knowledge and express his rage obliquely, in silence and sullen withdrawal” (Krakauer 122). McCandless did not have a good relationship with his parents, which might have been the reason he decided to go into the wild. Krakauer was able to find clues that caused McCandless to make dangerous
Chris’s personality exhibits the real foundation of the pattern of his heroic journey. The last thoughts of Chris McCandless were, “I have had a happy life and thank the Lord. Goodbye and may God bless you all!” (Krakauer 199). This demonstrates how Chris had a kind and compassionate heart. His considerate...
Jon Krakauer, fascinated by a young man in April 1992 who hitchhiked to Alaska and lived alone in the wild for four months before his decomposed body was discovered, writes the story of Christopher McCandless, in his national bestseller: Into the Wild. McCandless was always a unique and intelligent boy who saw the world differently. Into the Wild explores all aspects of McCandless’s life in order to better understand the reason why a smart, social boy, from an upper class family would put himself in extraordinary peril by living off the land in the Alaskan Bush. McCandless represents the true tragic hero that Aristotle defined. Krakauer depicts McCandless as a tragic hero by detailing his unique and perhaps flawed views on society, his final demise in the Alaskan Bush, and his recognition of the truth, to reveal that pure happiness requires sharing it with others.
“McCandless was something else – although precisely what is hard to say.” (pg. 85). Chris was a very different person, but not crazy. He was emotionally motivated at the time and had his mind set on Alaska. In the end, Chris was nowhere near prepared for this journey, but was too caught up in what he was trying to do to realize this. I agree with Krakauer that Chris wasn’t crazy or insane, but in his attempts to survive in Alaska he made several mistakes and ultimately, led an ill-prepared journey to Alaska that killed him.
...what was going on and figured that like me, he uses big words in the wrong places sometimes. Krakauer nearly became obsessed with McCandless. He writes about Chris as if he could have done the same thing when he was younger. Both are pretty arrogant and think they can take on the world. He even writes about his own mistakes in the world. It seems like the lives of Chris and Jon are a little bit parallel. They both took a lot of chances in their early twenties. Unlike Chris though, Jon lives through his mistakes and goes on to make lots of money selling books. This is a great story about human nature and what can go wrong if you think you can do too much. It kept me interested the whole time I was reading it. I would recommend this book to anyone who knows how to read.
Throughout the novel, Krakauer formulates strategies in his writing through the employment of logos, the appeal to reason. He utilizes this to allow the reader to learn about Chris’s personality throughout his life. “Nuance, strategy, and anything beyond the rudimentaries of technique were wasted on Chris. The only way he cared to tackle a challenge was head-on, right now, applying the full brunt of his extraordinary energy” (111). Chris was a person who would do things first, ask questions later in a sense. His compulsive behavior is accounted for when he decided to take on the adventure to Alaska. Moreover, it also led up to possible parallels between Krakauer himself and Chris within the second half of the novel. “When I decided to go to
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.
... every aspect of his life whether it be his education, physical endurance, or making it through the Alaskan wilderness with nothing more than a rifle, a backpack, and a road map. Chris was aware of his differences and that he did not fit into society. He fully embraced that and and chose to lead his own path. Chris led a happy life according to one of his last journal entries he wrote, “I have had a happy life and thank the lord. Goodbye and may God bless all!” (Krakauer 199). Chris was willing to risk everything to gain that happiness. His ambition to enter the wilderness, in the end, took his life but that did not stop him. He would have rather died a happy man than lived a miserable one. Chris ventured out into the wilderness and found himself; a tragic story for a tragic hero.
Chris McCandless is regarded as being something as a spiritual figure almost as a cult hero, some call him a disillusioned fool, some call him a great adventurer, and the debate still continues. As Matthew Power calls in his article, an article where he tells the story of McCandless,“The debate falls into two camps: Krakauer's visionary seeker, the tragic hero who dared to live the unmediated life he had dreamed of and died trying; or, as many Alaskans see it, the unprepared fool, a greenhorn who had fundamentally misjudged the wilderness he'd wanted so desperately to commune with.” Like so many stories covering Christopher McCandless’ death, both ends of the argument are discussed in an unfavored manner in the hopes to help develop an opinion on the McCandless story. This open ended question can only be answered open-endedly based on what the readers base for themselves as covered stories intend. Like Power has done, ...
..., the use of literary techniques including irony, characterization and theme convey the author’s purpose and enhance Into The Wild. The author accomplished his purpose of telling the true story of Chris McCandless. He was an eccentric, unpredictable man that led a very interesting life. His life deserved a tribute as truthful and respectful as Jon Krakauer’s. Through his use of literary techniques, the author creates an intense, and emotional piece of literature that captures the hearts of most of its readers. Irony, characterization, and theme all play a vital role in the creation of such a renowned work of art. “Sensational…[Krakauer] is such a good reporter that we come as close as we probably ever can to another person’s heart and soul” (Men’s Journal).
...opher McCandless is a unique and talented young man, but his selfish and ultimately complacent attitude towards life and his successes led to his demise. Chris possesses monumental ambitions that had the potential to be harvested into something great, but were not taken advantage of in the correct way. Through the book Krakauer paints a chilling picture of how detrimental choices can be. Had Chris been better prepared for his trip there is a good chance he would have walked out alive. Had Chris lived, he would not be famous, merely criticized for his poor choices and selfish behavior that deeply impacted those close to him. Chris is not a hero, nor should he be regarded as one. His actions were admired by others but spontaneous naive actions do not constitute a hero.
Chris McCandless seemed like a tremendous person with good grades and many amazing opportunities when he had the idea of going on a long road trip without telling anyone in his family on where he was going and getting away from everything and everyone he seemed to be what people called idiotic. In the Author's Note in the third paragraph Krakauer shows some of the opinions that people would have suggested McCandless was an idiot “He changed his name, gave the entire balance of twenty-four-thousand-dollars saving account to charity, abandoned his car and most of his possessions, burned all the cash in his wallet.” Many people would think abandoning your car and burning legal tender is an illegal act and no one in the right mind would do something like that. Additionally is that if he was willing to give up twenty four thousand dollars to charity, why would he not give whatever money was left in his wallet and give it to someone that might need instead of burning all of it.
All in all, it is interesting how the trials of life can lead a person into an awakening that inspires millions. Many people believe that walking “into the wild” to live off the land and find himself alone in nature was arrogant, foolish and irresponsible. Chris lacks of knowledge about the wild was a major factor in his death. Chris did not plan how he will survive in the wilderness without proper equipments. He misunderstood that he would have no problem in setting in the wild. Chris immature manner and decisions lead him to starvation and ultimately death. If he planned it out in the beginning he would have saved his life.