Chris Mccandless In Into The Wild

728 Words2 Pages

What was Krakauer thinking when he was talking about Chris McCandless? In the Alaskan wilderness, Peter Christian has described numerous young men who acted and ventured there similar to McCandless. If there are people who had ventured and faced death in the Alaskan wilderness just like McCandless, would Krakauer’s “Into the Wild” be different in regards to quality and character if Krakauer had used any other individual as the main character of his book? Based on how Krakauer wrote his book, Chris McCandless had an interesting story of his travels as told by Krakauer. Despite being an enigmatic and intellectual, however, McCandless shows that he is merely another young adult who had made bad decisions. First of all, the cause of Chris’s bad decisions falls on his character. For example, he refuses to accept help from others. Throughout Krakauer’s book, Chris refuses to accept any advice given from the people he met, especially those such as Westerberg and Jan Burres. His stubborn approach towards people shows his independent attitude throughout the story as he is determined to face obstacles independently. This is most evident in Chris’s time with Jan Burres. During the end of the fifth chapter, he displays his …show more content…

In reality, Chris’s death was not really a big deal and was rather exaggerated by Krakauer than it needed to be. The main reason was Chris’s unpreparedness. Due to Chris’s inexperience in handling the challenges the wilderness had to offer, Chris was left vulnerable and, as a result looked foolish. Peter also criticized Chris’s approach to handling resources as “just stupid, tragic, and inconsiderate” (Christian 2). Krakauer describes Chris’s experience to be more important compared to the typical adventurer, and shows authorial bias in favor of Chris, making Chris’s adventures seem more innocent and accidental. However, Christian shows an impartial attitude towards Chris and criticizes Chris’s

Open Document