into the wild

Good Essays
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.
Get Access