Jon Krakauer And Chris Mccandless

Medred poses a valid argument questioning Chris McCandless’ behavior and intentions, although his controversy lacks solid evidence outside of his harsh diction and blunt opinion. Krakauer reserved three years to research and etch the story of Chris McCandless, and through his use of juxtapositions and imagery whilst conveying ethos and pathos he thoroughly analyzes the actions and intentions of the young adventurer, crafting the superior saga of Chris McCandless. Through Krakauer’s journalistic integrity, he explores the complexities of human nature, the pursuit of freedom, and the allure of the wilderness through Chris McCandless. Krakauer establishes a compelling connection with Chris McCnadless through the infusion of his own narrative with credibility and authenticity. Reflecting on his own experiences, Krakauer recounts when he decided “to go to Alaska that April, like Chris McCandless, [he] was a raw youth who mistook passion for insight and acted according to an obscure, gap-ridden logic.

Jon Krakauer had the same experience as McCandless with his family and travel to Alaska, but Krakauer knew more about survival and had company in case of any danger. Krakauer compares, “as a young man, I was unlike Mccandless in many important regard… And I suspect we had a similar intensity, a similar heedlessness, a similar agitation of the soul” (55). Acknowledging McCandless’s background, Chris left society because, in Krakauer’s point of view, of the “agitation of the soul” and the “similar heedless” of society. McCandless didn’t agree with society’s standards that being successful meant having a well paid occupation, especially when McCandless’s parents enforced it onto him. McCandless truly did not want to uphold the wishes of his parents, for Chris to go to college and get high paying career, but it wasn’t what Chris really wanted, so he left all of his conflicts with his parents and his values or “agitation of the soul” to create a new identity as Alex Supertramp and live in the wild. In today’s modern world, humanity lives in an environment where people are controlled and dependent on others. Chris’s father is someone he despises because of his characteristic of being controlling. Walter becomes controlling over Chris, who pressured him into college. As a result, Chris has an “agitation of the soul” to become independent, and a “heedlessness” for society and had an “intensity” for

Jon Krakauer diverges from the story of McCandless’s journey, to inform the readers how all of the other adventures that occurred were similar. He wanted to show how other people were in his situation, that wanted to conquer the world with what the others had with them.

When Krakauer talks about what kind of person Chris was and talks about how much he respects Chris, he compares himself to Chris. He says how alike they both are and the reasons why they did what they did. Critics argue that Chris was a stupid kid and reckless. They say what he did is the reason he died and didn’t make it back to tell his journey to others. Peter Christian’s published essay that he wrote has a lot of criticism about Chris McCandless.

Krakauer uses this theme in order to lead the audience up to his reveal of Chris considering to return to civilization and to possibly forgive his parents for their immoral behavior. In the second epigraph, Krakauer borrows a quote from Boris Pasternak which states that you “cant advance in a certain direction without a certain faith.” Krakauer links this quote to Chris due to the fact that he strived to preserve his moral purity and to find more meaning in life by embarking on dangerous adventures in the nature, which allowed him to live a more fulfilling life. Krakauer further elaborated on the dangers which Chris faced during his time in the wilderness of Alaska by explaining the several types of poisonous plants which Chris was unfortunately exposed to, which resulted in his eventual death. Returning to the epigraph, Krakauer states that the only way desires such as these are maintained is by having personal connections with other people, which is a means of formulating the element of a “free personality” and offering “life as a sacrifice.” In this chapter, Krakauer recounts that one of Chris’ diary entries stated that he was willing to “shed some of the armor he wore around his heart,” and instead “intended to abandon the life of a solitary vagabond.” These writings from Chris may serve as an indication of the fact that Chris planned on leaving Alaska and returning to society in order to most likely rekindle the relationships which he left behind. Krakauer also manages to tie the events which occurred in Chris’ life to the overarching course of human history, which consists of huge advancements in challenging areas of life such as science and mathematics that are produced by the deep struggle to overcome the inescapable threat of

Jon Krakauer’s Into the Wild, describes the adventure of Christopher McCandless, a young man that ventured into the wilderness of Alaska hoping to find himself and the meaning of life. He undergoes his dangerous journey because he was persuade by of writers like Henry D. Thoreau, who believe it is was best to get farther away from the mainstreams of life. McCandless’ wild adventure was supposed to lead him towards personal growth but instead resulted in his death caused by his unpreparedness towards the atrocity nature.

Krakauer writes that he believed himself to be a lot like Chris in some aspects. He presents Chris throughout the book in a positive way but also fairly includes statements from other people who do not share his same opinion about Chris. Krakauer writes that Chris “wasn’t incompetent” (Krakauer 52). He believed that Chris would not have made it for as long as he did if he was incompetent. Like Timothy, Chris appealed to transcendentalism and Chris was huge on not wanting to have materialistic things, however, he was smart enough to know that he had to get a job and earn money in order to make it on his journey to Alaska to find a deeper connection in nature. A lot of people wrote that Chris had touched their lives and that they would always remember him, but not everyone felt that way. Krakauer even wrote that some people heaped harsh criticism on him for “glorifying what some thought was a foolish, pointless death.” (Krakauer 50). Others said that Chris was stupid and that if he would’ve survived he would have just been lucky and it would not have made him a better human. Because Krakauer included these opinions even though he disagreed, he was honest and fair in how he portrayed Chris

Krakauer admits that Chris McCandless was a rash, but he insists he "wasn't a nutcase, he wasn’t a sociopath, he wasn’t an outcast. McCandless was something else-- although precisely what is hard to say. A pilgrim, perhaps" (85). Many thought McCandless was wise and he knew what he was dong, while others disagree, stating his poor decisions contributed to his own death. In my opinion, Chris was indeed wise- he was a young man who didn’t care about labels, brands, big things, or anything materialistic. Instead, he thrived on more important concepts of life like truth and freedom. He believed he would find his true self and relieved of society once he became one with the wild.

“Nothing can bring you peace but yourself, Nothing can bring you peace but the triumphs of principles.” This is a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s Self-reliance which resonates with Krakauer’s and McCandless’ shared beliefs and interactions. This quote can help us to understand why McCandless and Krakauer enjoyed going into the wild. They were searching for themselves. By looking at their shared beliefs, their respective journeys, and Krakauer’s opinions of McCandless it can be seen that they have similar stories, but their stories both ended very

Although Chris McCandless’ controlling and toxic family environment was a major motive for his escape, his deep-seated internal battle was simply an irresistible impulse for discovery and liberty. Chris’ journey shows a new level of freedom; what true independence holds. He set out into nature alone without support of family or friends, searching for a path unlike those of most, and running from a barred cage of conventional living. Unsatisfied and somewhat angry with himself and his life of abundance in money, opportunity, and security, his preceding experiences and determined character lead him to an inevitable flee into no-mans land. Throughout the novel, Krakauer wants the reader to understand that there is more to Chris than his habit of criticising authority and defying society’s pressures. He needed more from himself, and more from life. He wasn’t an ordinary man, therefore could not live with an ordinary life. Krakauer demonstrates this by creating a complex persona for Chris that draws you in from the beginning.

Throughout the book, Krakauer documents the intoxicating life and death of Christopher McCandless, aka Alexander Supertramp, a young hitchhiker who embarked on an Alaskan Odyssey to explore himself and the wilderness. Like many before him, McCandless thought that he could give his life meaning by pursuing his “impractical fascination with the harsh side of nature” (Krakauer 85). At a young age, Chris lost his habitude for monotonous security and thus adopted an irrational and impulsive style of life. He believed that suppressing human relationships and deserting the materialistic world would strengthen his bond with nature. Christopher once wrote to his close friend that too many people were unwilling to change their troubling life and debatable circumstances because they were “conditioned to a life of security, and conformity, and conservatism.” Following up his conclusion he stated that this type of “secure future” brought peace to their mind, but in reality it was the most damaging thing that they ccould do to the adventurous spirit, being the very basic core of an individual’s passion (Krakauer 57). Christopher McCandless with his astounding spirit, the aspiration to succeed, and the longing to make things happen was determined to be free. He desired to live by his own moral code, without anyone putting shackles on his psyche. His plans went beyond what anyone could ever

Krakauer does have one thing in common with Chris. Sympathising with random people who they have never met and who probably don’t deserve it. “ Chris apparently judged artist and close friends by their work, not their life, yet he was temperamentally incapable of extending such lenity to his father.” ( Krakauer 122) The artists he mentions did the exact same stuff as his father, who he despises. Jack London was a drunk who had no clue what he was writing about, Tolstoy wrote a book about celibacy, yet had 13th children, some were even conceived when he published it. One author Chris admired greatly was a drunk like Jack, but even worse, he would also beat up his girlfriends. All of them liars and terrible people, based on their actions. Chris’s father beat his wife and his children, including Chris. He also lied to his kids and tried to hide having two families at the same time. Yet Krakauer says “... that McCandless did not misrepresent the facts; telling the truth was a credo he took seriously” (29). Completely ignoring the fact Chris looked up to, thought highly of, and enjoy the work of these artists even though one of them, their entire book was a lie.

Krakauer is able to make a lens, which I did not experience, that I am able to interpret Chris through.   After leaving Krakauer's job and his family "the world was suddenly rich with possibility"(136). This world was much more appealing to these young men then the world their father had planned for them. Chris and Krakauer were sons looking for ways to get away from the perfection their fathers desired from the sons. "When long-held family secrets came to light, when I noticed that this deity who asked for perfection was himself less than perfect" (148).

Throughout the entire book, Krakauer shows that Chris really impacted basically everyone he came across’ life. How does he struggle with the different if he is a good kid that has great manners and helps out people he does not even know, Westerburg for example Chris helped him in his different fields that needed to be plowed. Those who think he was stubborn have the wrong image of Chris, he is actually admirable. This is obvious because once he sets his mind to do something to do it. Those that say that's what made him decide to go on the trip don't realize that Chris would have probably never known about the Alaskan wilderness if it was not for the different books he read.

The story of Chris McCandless has become a pop culture phenomenon. Many are fascinated by his desire to abandon his family and society and “walk into the wild” (Krakauer 69). Newscasts, magazine articles, movies, and books have tried to define what motivated him to give up everything for his Alaskan odyssey; however, the answers died with McCandless. People make assumptions about him without knowing his entire story. McCandless chose to do the unconventional, making people think he was either foolish or brave and determined, but ultimately he was selfish for doing what he did.