Does a correlation exist between what is considered to be meaningless versus what is considered to be meaningful? The association between them comes from the concept existentialism. Existentialism is a psychological lens in which everything is inherently meaningless until someone assigns meaning to it. In On Being Zac Morris, Chuck Klosterman writes about what the popular TV show, Saved by the Bell, means to him, by revisiting past memories in his life that prove to be existential. In Selections from Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer writes about the story of Chris McCandless, as he retraces the steps of McCandless’ journey with his friends, which demonstrates the existential aspects of McCandless’ journey. Although Klosterman focuses on his …show more content…
In his work, Krakauer talks about the value of McCandless’ journey. Krakauer describes the nature of McCandless’ journey, claiming that “Unlike Muir and Thoreau, McCandless went into the wilderness not primarily to ponder nature or the world at large, but, rather, to explore the inner country of his own soul” (220). That is existential because McCandless is assigning a particular meaning for his trip to Alaska. McCandless is not traveling to Alaska for fun, he has a purpose to find his “soul” within the wilderness. Later on in his work, Krakauer explains how McCandless views happiness when he says, “I have lived through much, and now I think I have found what is needed for happiness. A quiet secluded life in the country, with the possibility of being useful to people to whom it is easy to do good... – such is my idea of happiness” (211). That is existential because Krakauer is explaining McCandless’ meaning of happiness. To McCandless happiness entails seclusion in the country, whereas for someone else, happiness could be being married with kids, living in a large home with a white picket fence. Another example of existentialism in Krakauer’s work is McCandless’ discovery of the dilapidated bus. When McCandless finds the bus, he assigns it special meaning when he writes in his journal “Bus Day” (Krakauer 207). The bus is valuable to McCandless because he uses it as a place of shelter on his trip. To others, who may just be hiking the trail for the day, the bus may be viewed as old, run-down, and worthless. To McCandless, it is his place of shelter, which keeps him alive much longer than if he did not find the
Rhetorical Analysis of Jon Krakauer’s “Into the Wild ” Jon Krakauer ’s purpose in writing Into the Wild is to recount Chris McCandless’ journey, physical and metaphysical, from college in Georgia to his death in Alaska, through the use of factual, and anecdotal evidence. Krakauer uses factual evidence to establish that he is a trustworthy narrator capable of giving the reader a realistic scope on the events in the story. Jon uses anecdotal evidence to see into Chris’ psyche from the various perspectives found in the book’s excerpts, including how Jon understands the events.
In Into The wild, Krakauer narrates the last couple of journeys Mccandless had on his adventure to Alaska where he ultimately died. Mccandless Touched many people's lives through all of his journeys. Mccandless went on these journeys because he was confused in life when he figured out his dad had cheated on his mom. This changed Mccandless to the point he began to hate his parents. Mccandless had a lot of confidence in himself so he left on an adventure to find his identity.
One of Krakauer’s strongest tools in supporting his argument comes from the use of epigraphs. Krakauer begins every chapter with an epigraph; some are brief and concise, while others are an entire page. Nevertheless, each epigraph has a specific location for a specific reason. Quoting various fragments, including “...a person whose principal need was to find some kind of meaning in life, not [entirely or even chiefly] dependent upon relationships.” (61) sounds eerily similar to McCandless’ logic.
While McCandless was submerged into the utmost wilderness without even the basic necessities that the average person would require for survival in uninhabited Alaska. Krakauer himself says that McCandless did not go into the wilderness to contemplate nature or the world, but instead to explore the “inner country of his own
Jon Krakauer’s Into the Wild investigates the life and adventures of Chris McCandless. The author provides information about Chris’ life to illuminate his journey. Krakauer also uses rhetorical appeals to defend Chris’ rationale for his journey. Through Krakauer’s use of pathos, ethos, and logos, he persuades the audience that Chris is not foolish; however, Krakauer’s intimacy with Chris and his adventures inhibits his objectivity.
Into The Wild portrays a man who went on a fatal unforgettable journey through the alaska wilderness. Chris McCandless was a man with great courage and the ability to live on his own made him more of a hero going on his fatal journey. Many would say he was foolish or not thinking right, but that is not the case. The case here is simply a man with courage wanting to fulfill is beliefs through his journey. One may ask what is courage.
It is true that Krakauer mentions his own viewpoint of McCandless, but people can still have different opinions on him. For example, in chapter eight people have made up their opinions on McCandless base on reading the Outside article. They said he was “forsaken a loving family,” unprepared, not wise on going to Alaska, and was preparing to die (Krakauer 74). However, that point is not true because it was based on what they read from the article. By reading the article they only know the exterior of him and not know the reason why he went to Alaska.
The Alaskan Bush is one of the hardest places to survive without any assistance, supplies, skills, and little food. Jon Krakauer explains in his biography, Into The Wild, how Christopher McCandless ventured into the Alaskan Bush and ultimately perished due to lack of preparation and hubris. McCandless was an intelligent young man who made a few mistakes but overall Krakauer believed that McCandless was not an ignorant adrenalin junkie who had no respect for the land. Krakauer chose to write this biography because he too had the strong desire to discover and explore as he also ventured into the Alaskan Bush when he was a young man, but he survived unlike McCandless. Krakauer’s argument was convincing because he gives credible evidence that McCandless was not foolish like many critics say he was.
Born in A Different Life Life on the road is an idealistic way to escape from societal problems. There is no denying that it grants individuals satisfaction by allowing them to fulfill their goals, as well as providing immense freedom and control over one’s life; however, it is a fundamentally illogical path to take due to nature’s malevolence. In Into The Wild, Krakauer writes a biography about a young man named Chris McCandless, in which he illustrates the similarities between himself and McCandless’s overly ambitious journey to accomplish feats in the wilderness. Coinciding with their similarities, they also faced an oppressive father figure at home, which lead the both of them to believe that their journey will provide them an answer to their problems at home. McCandless planned to survive in Alaska by living off the land while Krakauer wanted to be the first one to climb the Devil’s Thumb.
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.
Chris McCandless abandoned the modern world and chose the wild because he believed that he could improve himself through living in the wild, and found the true happiness of the life. McCandless abandoned his wealthy family because of his complicated relationship with his father, and he was ashamed with his father’s adultery. Therefore, McCandless believed that human relationship was not the only thing that forms happiness, instead a man’s connection with the nature brings joy as well. He also believed the habitual lifestyle was not what people were meant to do, and people shouldn't have more possessions than what they need. For this reason, McCandless traveled with little effects.
Being materialistic isn’t such a bad thing, but some people take it to the extreme by either wanting too many things or having less than enough to survive. In the book “Into the Wild” Chris McCandless does not feel that materialism is important. When Chris tries to be less materialistic he takes it to the extreme and tries to live off of the wilderness with only a 10 lb bag of rice and a .22 caliber rifle. In the book “Into the Wild” by Jon Krakaur, Chris McCandless is very anti-materialistic and gives away all of his things, proving that having a lot of possessions was not something he valued. Materialism is a big issue for Chris.
In the 19th and 20th century transcendentalism was a new and exciting topic that caused tremendous controversy. In the novel Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer, Chris McCandless was a man with a very unique character. In more detailed words Chris McCandless was a transcendentalist. His actions and moods played a big part in his life, from beginning to end. He was a transcendentalist because of his self-reliance, confidence and non-conformity.
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.
When McCandless graduated from college, he found the possibility to go away for a while, “He had fled the claustrophobic confines of his family” (Krakauer 55). McCandless could finally go away looking for a journey full of adventures, but he wasn’t going to five stars hotels or luxurious places. His journey was precarious and wild, that was exactly what he was looking for. Places that were difficult for someone to reach and loneliness was abundant, the only interaction was with nature and savage animals. Happiness engulfed McCandless when backpacking anywhere, it was his joy.