Jon Krakauer Rhetorical Analysis

513 Words3 Pages

Krakauer In the beginning of the last section of the novel uses a narrative and descriptive style. The point of view is first person. The only time the author doesn’t use first person is when he is talking about events that he didn’t see himself. That’s when he transfers to a third person. Krakauer uses imagery in the novel as well. Furthermore, he says, “The skin on her face was the color of white porcelain.” Jon Krakauer has a desperate tone after saying, “After a night at 26,000 feet without supplemental oxygen, I was even weaker and more exhausted than I had been the previous evening after coming down from the summit.” Looking back at one of the symbols of bottled oxygen it used it rescue people. Furthermore, Krakauer says, “the IMAX team joins in the …show more content…

Many of them are inexperienced and would undoubtedly never make it to the top without a guide. The one unifying characteristic shared by all of the climbers is that they have money—enough to shell out $65,000 a piece for their shot at the top. Krakauer spends long chapters giving his best, most educated guesses about why climbers made certain decisions, and what happened to the people who disappeared. This is an exercise that must result in major frustration, as no one can be entirely sure what took place. Many mistakes later, Krakauer manages to piece together an outline of what happened to whom and when during the climb, but the questions he struggles with in almost every situation are "why" and "how". In the long run, Krakauer concludes that complete arrogance is in part to blame for the tragedy that takes place on Everest. Hall "bragged on more than one occasion that he could get almost any reasonably fit person to the summit." Their arrogance also caused their clients to lower their guard and not fully appreciate the risks of the expedition. Overall, Krakauer taught many different themes within the novel that everyone should

Open Document