Have you ever wanted to purposefully strand yourself in the Alaskan wilderness and inevitably die alone? Now you can, through literature! When reading Jon Krakauer’s Into the Wild, one follows the story of 24 year old Chris McCandless, a makeshift survivalist whose attempt to escape life, cost him his life. As the novel progresses, the author builds an argument upon first hand accounts, thoroughly psychoanalyzing McCandless’ actions post-mortem. He claims that McCandless, despite his obvious faults, was courageous and inspirational. This is incredibly wrong. McCandless is not brave or inspiring. Krakauer simply projected himself―his experiences, emotions, and values―onto a person he never met. He drew heavily from his own experiences, creating …show more content…
Here’s the answer, plain and simple: Chris McCandless was not important enough to write a book about. He was one of the countless individuals who trekked into the Alaskan wilderness, yet failed to survive and tell the tale himself. It’s safe to say that Chris McCandless’ “perseverance” and “bravery” amounts to significantly less than the feats of many others, and his personality is completely indistinguishable from the typical brooding male protagonist. Societal rejection, isolationism, an endless salad bar of superiority complexes, severe daddy issues… these are not atypical traits, so why does Krakauer find them so interesting? Krakauer very obviously relates to McCandless, which he states plainly, “I was willful, self-absorbed, intermittently reckless, moody. I disappointed my father in the usual ways. Like McCandless, male figures of authority aroused in me a confusing medley of corked fury and a hunger to please. [...] If something captured my undisciplined imagination, I pursued it with a zeal bordering on obsession” (Krakauer 134). To Krakauer, Chris McCandless was a personality he held close to him, felt a connection with. Therefore, the romantic, idealized concept of McCandless is what Krakauer became enamoured with, not the story of inept almost-but-not-quite survival. That is why he was chosen against braver, more significant figures. He
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Into the Wild, a book by Jon Krakauer, records the true story of Chris McCandless and his journey into the Alaskan Wilderness. Most who read the book find it to be an inspiration and see Chris as a heroic voyager who braved the Alaskan wilderness. But with a deeper look into the story, it becomes more evident that Chris was actually more depressed than brave To start, Chris was completely unprepared. He chose to venture into the dangerous unknown of the Alaskan wilderness with nothing but a gun, some rice, a few books, and what clothes he had on. Even when he was offered some food and supplies by the man who dropped him off, he insisted that he didn’t want any, saying,”Before Alex left, he reached behind his seat, pulled out an old
That puts an emphasis on his opinion that McCandless really dared to differ. Due to our own reasoning, we often judge too soon, and think negative of those who tried to different. We often assume that they might actually be crazy and need some mental help. It’s not true all the time though. Krakauer added, “He wasn’t a nutcase, he wasn’t a sociopath, he wasn’t an outcast,” (85).
The inspiration another influence can have on someone’s life is immeasurable and intense; changing whole life paths. This phenomenon is exemplified by Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer. In this novel, the main character, Chris McCandless assumes a new identity, hitchhikes to Alaska, and eventually succumbs as starvation claims his life in the Alaskan bush. This morbid ending does not stop many young people from connecting to his charismatic ideas and following in Chris’s footsteps. The legacy that Chris left on the minds of America is a more lasting one than he could have ever imagined.
Into the Wild Over the summer I read a novel by Jon Krakauer “Into the Wild”. The novel was about a young boy who took necessary risk to discover who he truly was. Chris McCandless-often referred to as Alexander Supertramp was an American hiker, whose last adventure turned out to be a fatal one. McCandless decomposed body was found on a bus in Alaska taiga.
He had his own way of life. He didn't want to wake up in the morning doing the same few things every day so, he changed it. This story that was written about McCandless was worth telling. First, to start off John Krakauer was an amazing person to tell such an awesome story.
He showed immense passion and dedication towards what he wanted to achieve. He did what everyone wants to do at least once—escape. Through his writing, Krakauer was able to capture McCandless's fascination and desire that showed his vision and desire to get out and go.
Throughout chapters 8 and 9, the author showed his bias towards Chris McCandless, which is an act of defiance to his position as an objective journalist, when he attempted to alter the readers’ negative point of view towards Chris by the introduction of different people who had similar experiences and characteristics as him and then making comparison. After reading the previous chapters, the readers have already made their own judgement on Chris, which are probably mostly negative. To address this issue, Krakauer initiates chapter 8 by introducing negative comments and mails not only about Chris but also to him, the author. These will serve as an argument that he will later attempt to disprove while at the same time, still informing the readers about what makes Chris special and unique.
Krakauer completes gaps in Chris’ story; but loses objectivity as he intertwines Chris’ experiences and emotions with his own. Though Krakauer’s details about Chris provide insight, his emotional involvement in Chris’ life becomes an
Christopher McCandless, the protagonist of the novel and film Into The Wild by Jon Krakauer, is not your average guy. Driven by his minimalist ideals and hate for society, he challenged the status quo and embarked on a journey that eventually lead to his unforeseen demise. A tragic hero, defined by esteemed writer, Arthur Miller, is a literary character who makes an error of judgment or has a fatal flaw that, combined with fate and external forces, brings on tragedy. Christopher McCandless fulfills the role of Miller’s tragic hero due to the fact that his tragic flaw of minimalism and aversion towards society had lead him to his death.
However, Jon Krakauer proves his argument that McCandless was not arrogant, foolish, antisocial, or crazy by giving examples of other young men who were similar to McCandless to show that his journey wasn’t unprecedented. He also proves that McCandless wasn’t antisocial because he developed personal relationships with Ronald Franz, Wayne Westerberg, and Jan Burres in such a short amount of time and explaining the many times that McCandless respected the Alaskan Bush. Krakauer admits that McCandless may have suffered from hubris; he was still a victim of circumstances. Krakauer proves that McCandless had an intrinsic motivation to discover and that he wasn’t alone because Krakauer too ventured into the Alaskan Bush when he was younger. The Alaskan Bush is a very difficult place to survive if one isn’t prepared for many challenges such as hunting for food or staying warm in the frost ridden
The revelation that he was merely human, and frightfully, so beyond my power to forgive (148 Krakauer ).” And how McCandless could not accept how his father wanted to used money to get Chris to be someone that he is not or control him. Another example for the distaste towards authority, “Like McCandless, figures of male authority aroused in me a confusing medley of cork fury and a hunger to please... If something captured undisciplined imagination, I pursued it with a zeal bordering on a obsession, and from the age of 17 until my late twenties... (134 Krakauer
Krakauer also put some of McCandless’ journals and letters in the book. According to Shaun Callarmans analysis Chris McCandless had no business going to Alaska. Callarman thinks Chris McCandless is just plain crazy. Callarman doesn't admire his courage or noble ideas. Even though Shaun Callarman thinks Chris McCandless was bright and ignorant, also made mistakes because of his arrogance, I disagree with Callarmans analysis
In addition, in a journal entry, McCandless writes, “It is the experiences, the memories, the great triumphant joy of living to the fullest extent in which real meaning is found. God it’s great to be alive! Thank you. Thank you” (Krakauer 37). This excerpt shows that McCandless sincerely is at peace with himself and the world because of where his ideals have taken him.
Perspective of Christopher McCandless’s Life Callarman’s argument to Christopher McCandless’s is relatable and understanding, but he does not see the full picture. Christopher McCandless had everything in his life: money, material, family, prestige etc. but the only thing he wanted to fully experience is the outside world, to get out of his comfort zone and see how nature really feels like. I would agree with Callarman’s argument because he was arrogant and unenlightenment, but I also would disagree because he died doing what he loved and a place he wanted to be.
Throughout the novel, Krakauer uses strategies to demonstrate comparisons between himself and Christopher McCandless. These comparisons effectively show that Chris was sane enough to make his own decisions regarding Alaska. One of the reasons why Krakauer wrote this book was because he experienced a natural liking for McCandless. Ever since his initial encounter with McCandless’s story while working at the Outside magazine company, his affinity towards the young adventurer grew by leaps and bounds. This affinity came from the very similar experiences the two were involved in.