Rhetorical Analysis Of Into The Wild By Jon Krakauer

A Rhetorical Analysis of Into The Wild

Who could possibly know that the story of one young man could turn the people of Alaska against him, and others from around the country to rally behind his almost majestic journey. Jon Krakauer set out to get Chris McCandless’s story written in greater depth after his article was ran in the magazine Outside and he received so much mail on that topic that inspired him to do more, more than just Chris’s journey itself. This essay will analyze Jon Krakauer’s book Into The Wild in order to show how well he used the rhetorical analysis concepts and rhetorical appeals.

Into The Wild is a book that starts off with the ending right on the front page, this stirs that all too well known fact that when we learn

Krakauer explains this by showing us his final postcard (133-134). He says “When the adventure did indeed prove fatal, this melodramatic declaration fueled considerable speculation that the boy had been bent on suicide from the beginning, that when he walked into the bush, he had no intention of ever walking out again...My suspicion that McCandless’s death was unplanned…” (Krakauer 134). Krakauer tells us a bit later in the book, “Satisfied, apparently, with what he had learned during his two months of solitary life in the wild, McCandless decided to return to civilization...maybe he was prepared to forgive their imperfections...McCandless seemed ready, perhaps, to go home..There is no question however, that he intended to walk out of the bush” (169-169). Most people, unknowing of that post card would claim he is suicidal, but Chris, in his own words said that if it should prove fatal, the way he writes this isn’t how someone would be writing a goodbye note, this is someone who intends to come back out and see all of their friends that they’ve made during their journey. Chris even managed to begin the journey home, only to be set back by nature itself which tells us that he wanted to leave the wilderness and return to some semblance of civilization whether it be back in Carthage, or back home with his

They shared something that most people do, but all the while taking it to the extreme. Krakauer and Chris both disliked their fathers, to which Krakauer writes about himself, “I disappointed my father in the usual ways. Like McCandless, figures of male authority aroused in me a confusing medley of corked fury and hunger to please” (134). Writing an article just wasn’t enough. Krakauer found much of himself in Chris McCandless that he had to go out and write something much more in depth that he could link back to himself as he almost met the same fate as Chris did, although in much different circumstances. Knowing this, one might assume that he may have taken too much of a liking to Chris and was a bit biased with his writing. I believe he was objective enough when the time came to not assume that. There were people that absolutely hated and loved Chris, enough that a simple article wasn’t going to cut