Analysis Of Into The Wild, By Jon Krakauer

He didn’t take any shortcuts or cheat his way through; he paved every step himself and owned up to his mistakes. To repay Gallien for the ride, Chris “insisted on giving Gallien his watch, his comb, and what he said was all his money: eighty-five cents in loose change” (Krakauer 7). From an outside point of view, this act might have seemed extra and unnecessary, but to Chris’s conscience, he should give back what he received. He was aware of the chance that he would not come out of the Alaskan wild again so he didn’t want to leave any unpaid debts or favors. Rather than just accepting others’ gifts, or even asking for items, he wanted to earn his own way to Alaska. Throughout the journey, he worked diligently, “...doing dirty, tedious jobs that nobody else wanted to tackle…” (Krakauer 62) in order to achieve his dream. His moral compass might not have been what society considers “right”, but “It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right” (Thoreau). When “Gallien asked whether he had a hunting license” (Krakauer 6), Chris responded with “How I feed myself is none of the government’s business” (Krakauer 6). From a legal standpoint, yes, hunting without the license is illegal, but from Chris’s view, he is not hurting anyone by not having the license. He believed that society is corrupt and therefore he didn’t need the system

In these instances it is by luck alone that Chris does not end up suffering an even earlier death. The most obvious example of Chris’ naivety is why he even began his journey in the first place. He had read many books by Jack London, but “he seemed to forget they were works of fiction”(44). These fictitious tales of the “beautiful, white North” gave him false ideas of what the Alaska really was, and how dangerous it could really be. He lacked the common sense to realize that these books weren’t really an accurate depiction of what his journey would actually be like. Throughout the entire book, Chris also shows an inability to prepare for his expeditions. Most prominent of these instances is Chris’ failure to bring the appropriate supplies for his trip through the stampede trail. “He wasn’t carrying anywhere near as much food and gear as you’d expect”(4). Chris’ naive dream to live on next to nothing in the wild is simply idiotic. Not only did he pack far too little to survive, but he refused to accept Gallien’s expert advice or even an offer of better supplies. Even an experienced hunter such as Gallien couldn’t imagine living in the wild with as little as Chris brought, so how could Chris, an inexperienced kid from California, be expected to survive with only 10

Happiness is not easily achieved in this life and sometimes it will make you pay high prices for it. Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer is a book talking about an adventurer named Chris McCandless that lost his life looking for his happiness. Chris was a smart boy that had the potential to go to Harvard law school, but he left his family, friends and education to go to Alaska. Krakauer wrote about McCandless’ journey to provide clear the reasons McCandless went to Alaska and why he did it and what he went through because Krakauer saw In McCandless. Krakauer wrote about McCandless’s journey while including some detailed reasoning and excuses for McCandless actions. Krakauer’s purpose of writing Into the wild furnish to the writing style

Chris McCandless was a young man who walked into the wild alone to fulfil his lifelong journey of being at peace with nature. However, this journey was cut short when the harsh realities of the wild led McCandless to his demise. There are many speculations as to why McCandless did what he did and what truly led him to the wild. One speculations many people believe was the cause of Chris McCandless going into the wild was because of his young arrogance and stubbornness. However, the real reason McCandless went into the wild was due to his literary influences and family complications.

Chris knew that it could be fatal but he still did it as stated “If this adventure proves fatal and you don’t ever hear from me again I want you to know you’re a great man. I now walk into the wild”. Chris was a risk taker he knew that the things he did could be fatal to him but he still decided to take those risks and go to the wilderness. Chris’ s nature wasn’t that he was noble or arrogant but that he was free spirited so much that he could dead because of it and he did with a cause of death by

When Christopher J. McCandless entered the Alaskan wilderness, his main goal was to survive. There has been a lot of speculation over whether the boy was suicidal. My first reason for believing that Chris was not suicidal is because he tried to survive and make a life for himself on all of his expeditions. My second reason is that Chris planned on returning from Alaska. Chris looked for challenge and adventure. As Jon Krakauer stated in Into the Wild, “I believe in the case of Chris McCandless - that was a very different thing from wanting to die.”

The story of Chris McCandless’s journey and eventual death in the Alaskan wilderness has intrigued thousands of readers. While many factors, such as lack of preparation, ignorance of the potential danger, and not following the advice of others, contributed to his demise, the actual cause of Chris’s death is highly debated.

During Chris’s journey, he was able to accomplish a lot which most people would dream of. For instance, “By the end of summer in 1990, McCandless had driven his Datsun through Arizona, California, and South Dakota, where he worked at a grain elevator in Carthage.” Also, one day “A flash flood disabled his car, at which point he removed its license plates, took what he could carry, and kept moving on foot.” This proves that Chris McCandless was not ignorant. Chris McCandless always kept moving on no matter what conflict came his way. When he went into the wild, he was committed to staying there as long as he could. He survived for four months in the wild. However, he is

Chris Mccandless was a young man who hitchhiked his way to Alaska in 1992. Leaving behind his friends, his family, and his life. He left all his belongings, donated $25,000 to charity, deserted his car, and burned all the cash in his wallet. He went into this crazy adventure taking only a rifle with 400 rounds of ammunition, a book, a writing utensil, a journal, a camera, a large bag of rice, a cooking utensil, a knife, a hook with fishing twine, and matches. Only to die 4 months later in what they believe the cause if the death was starvation. I strongly believe that the reason Chris went into the wild was because of his family problems and mental illness.

Chris was very intelligent receiving a degree from Emory University, graduating with a double major in history and anthropology. Chris had high honors and was on course to get into Harvard. After graduating he decided to move travel across the country and up into Alaska. Many people are stuck thinking he was not prepared for this journey but it is widely believed that “he was sufficiently skilled to last for sixteen weeks on little more than his wits and ten pounds of rice. And he was fully aware when he entered the bush that he had given himself do previously slim margin for error. He knew precisely what was at stake.” (182) Chris lasted a very long time with very little. He did what many people couldn't and that is to survive in

He was so focused on being in the wild away from all civilization that he put himself in extensive danger. Krakauer wrote, “In coming to Alaska, McCandless yearned to wander uncharted country, to find a blank spot on the map. But Chris, with his idiosyncratic logic, came up with an elegant solution to this dilemma: He simply got rid of the map” (Krakauer 174). By throwing away his map, he essentially threw away all connection to humanity. If he had chosen to keep the map he could have walked out of the wild, healthy and ready to begin his life as an adult. He loved the wilderness so much that he wanted to nothing to stand in the way of it. Moreover, the perfection of nature blinded his unmatured personality to throwing away the map. The forcefulness of his love of independency and nature drove him to make idiotic decisions that cost him his

Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer uses McCandless as safety net. I think it was important to compare and contrast McCandless, Ruess, Rosellini and Waterman because it shows us many aspect of these men that were the same to chris but very much different at the same time. It's important to show how these men went through there own personal struggles while equipping the same personal goals. You probably understand one man more than the other but connected to them all individually. Which Krakauer does connect McCandless , Ruess, Rosellini, Waterman but proves his goal was more realistic in the real world.

Imagine spending thirty days alone in a tent or a cabin in the wilderness with no technology, electricity, running water, and any form of communication. Every day you wake up to the sight of the beautiful, tall trees and the various wildlife living in the area. Most of the time, you can hear the many sounds of nature: the majestic songs of birds, the whistling in the wind, and trees rustling. But sometimes all you can hear is nothing but silence. Most of us would not be able to do this and we would most likely want to be anywhere but here. Not many people will experience living in the wilderness, but for those who have will have memories to treasure forever. Among those people who would choose this

In the novel Into The Wild by Jon Krakauer, Chris had a mind set to achieve the impossible. Hitchhiking Alaska is hard enough if a person has the right gear and supplies. Chris leaves everything behind, including his car, money, and most of his possessions. Some people think this behavior is brave and courageous. Others would think that Chris is dumb and ignorant for leaving his family and all of his personal belongings. Chris is a fool for hitchhiking Alaska with no gear, supplies, money, or personal belongings.

Imagine this: a young adult vanishes without a trace to venture off into the wild and “discover” himself. With the bearings of a modern-day bildungsroman, such a story may not seem uncommon; after all, young adult novels and films have both glorified and censured the youthful adventure tale, perpetuating an image of adolescents (particularly young males) as courageous yet foolhardy individuals who adamantly desire self-discovery. Such depictions may not be far from reality, as demonstrated by the story of Chris McCandless in Jon Krakauer’s non-fiction book Into the Wild. Krakauer presents a relatively objective account of 24-year-old McCandless’s brief sojourn in the Alaskan wilderness and the events leading to his death, offering opinions from individuals who criticized the young man’s arrogance and foolhardiness as well as those who extolled McCandless as a noble, brave hero. To establish an extreme and unyielding stance on Chris McCandless – viewing him as either a righteous idealist or an inexperienced dunderhead – would disregard McCandless’s nuanced personality and his sensitive familial circumstances. When one takes into account McCandless’s estrangement from his family and his worship of author Jack London’s The Call of the Wild, it becomes clear that while McCandless was an ignorant and overconfident hypocrite who was unable to survive in the wild, he genuinely adhered to his beliefs and was not wholly responsible for his own death.