Into the Wild tells the story of Chris McCandless, a young man who embarked on an adventure across the U.S. Chris lived for adventure, and sadly met his demise in the Alaskan wilderness. Chris’ death brought about a large debate as to whether Chris was insane or simply idealistic. Krakauer wrote Into the Wild to prove Chris’ sanity and soundly completes that task by using rhetorical devices to persuade his audience. Throughout the book, Krakauer uses ethos to develop Chris’ credibility by providing examples of people who are similar to him. For example, Krakauer provides multiple examples of people who were very similar to Chris, such as Everett Ruess.
NAME: Naima Campbell Period: 7 MAJOR WORKS DATA SHEET Title: Into the Wild Author: Jon Krakauer Date of Publication: January 13, 1996 Genre: Biography, Non-fiction, Travel Literature Biographical Information about the Author Who is the author? Include the author’s birth/death (if applicable) dates, educational background, occupation, awards, etc.
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.
Jon Krakauer has a high amount of respect for Christopher J. McCandless; not only because they have many similarities, but because McCandless searched deep for the meaning of life and did as he pleased. In the book, “Into The Wild,” Krakauer not only tells the story of McCandless, but also of his own life, and how he has been shaped into his own. Krakauer had a deep love for the wild, just as Chris did. Though, the two did not do the same things, they both pursued their passions which made it easier for Krakauer to relate to Chris. Once climbing a mountain, Krakauer had ran into trouble, just as Chris did on his journey.
Anyone can have a story in their life and can turn it into a book. Jon Krakauer wrote Into the Wild on what happened to Christopher McCandless and turned his story into a novel. Jon Krakauer´s structure his novel to let the reader have their own opinions on Christopher McCandless by stating the book is on his bias viewpoint, putting it in non-chronological order, and wrote about his own background life story, which is all important to strengthen Krakauer 's motive of writing his book. Into the Wild, focuses on the young individual named Christopher McCandless who hitchhiked to Alaska. Along the way, in his journey, he met new people and traveled in many places.
Krakauer’s anecdote illustrates how he was drawn to the story of Mccandless and how Chris’s actions, thoughts, and mental processes came naturally. He informs us of the inevitable accidents that can occur while hiking the wilderness, as well as his own mindset during his similarly troubled, youthful years. Krakauer went through similar mental growth as Chris, but had the fortune of surviving where Chris did not. Unlike McCandless, he didn’t have a single minded focus of living an idealistic life inspired by a great such as Jack London or Thoreau, but Krakauer did yearn for something larger than himself. Both he and Chris shared the desire of personal morality.
Here is a quote from the book in which Krakauer demonstrates his personal opinion of McCandless and uses his own personal past actions he made as a young man to help show the connection between his younger self and Chris and why he has these opinions about Chris. This quote shows that Krakauer believes based on his own experience that Chris did not want to die and was not on a suicide mission. Along with this opinion proven throughout the book through observations and personal experiences Krakauer continues to be a presence and incorporates other opinions and factual things to disprove the people who are against McCandless and prove what he thinks is right. He disproves the thought that Chris might have been on a suicide mission. He disproves
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
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.
His journal also holds words of disappointment in his last days. He speaks of his desperate and progressively futile efforts to survive. His journal entries were also published. The new York times published his journal entries which lead to his story being published by Jon KrakAuer. Both men’s journals are the only evidence of their dream being pursued in the wilderness of
Despite Krakauer 's honorable attempts to portray Chris as someone who is relatable and should be pitied, Chris is portrayed as careless and inconsiderate. Krakauer 's biased diction end up showing Chris as stupid and egotistical. In the beginning Krakauer starts off make Chris a relatable person however after the first few pages Krakauer turns Chris into a superficial rich entitled person who thought he was able to do anything without repercussion. There are many instances where Krakauer reveals Chris as such. Chris may have been innocent in his ideals but that was his mistake, “For most of the sixteen-week ordeal…McCandless more than held his own.
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.
Into The Wild is written in both the 1st person, when the author is giving his own opinion or giving credibility, and in the 3rd person, when the author or anyone being quoted is talking about Chris McCandless. The effect Krakauer achieves is the notion of how isolated individuals exist in a state of wilderness and establishing his credibility. Krakauer personally connects with McCandless and explores every aspect of his life to discover the real truth of his death, and is convinced he did not die from starvation. He becomes emotionally attached to Chris and even develops a strong relationship with his parents. As a result, this effect leads to his writing being slightly biased.
Going out into the wild all by yourself can be nerve wracking and lonely. Jon Krakauer makes Chris McCandless seemed like a noble person who took the initiative to try to go out and live into the wild. The book Into the Wild written by Jon Krakauer, is about a teenager named Chris McCandless leaving society and traveling to Alaska by himself with nothing else but a bag of rice and a small .22 caliber gun. Chris is heroic because he went to Alaska by himself without any knowledge of Alaska and didn’t know any of the dangers of Alaska. One way Krakauer make Chris seem noble is when Chris is about to enter Alaska he tells Gallien “ I’m goin’ to get on up there live off the land,go claim me a piece of the good life” (Krakauer 4).
Chris McCandless was in his early 20’s, he was the kind of that guy that wanted to learn and experience life without all of the material things. He wanted to be independent from his parents and friends so Chris did something that would be insane for most of us humans but to him, it wasn’t. He went into the wild of Alaska for months, in fact, McCandless even thought he could make it out alive at the end of his journey. As a matter of fact, he was known as being a risk taker and enjoyed being out and about in the nature side of the world. Many would believe that Chris McCandless went into the wild to purposely kill himself; however, I myself believe that McCandless did not do it purposely.