In April of 1992 a young man named Chris McCandless, from a prosperous and loving family, hitchhiked across the country to Alaska. He gave $25,000 of his savings to charity, left his car and nearly all of his possessions. He burned all the cash he had in his wallet, and created a new life. Four months later, his body was found in an abandoned bus. Jon Krakauer constructed a journalistic account of McCandless’s story. Bordering on obsession, Krakauer looks for the clues to the mystery that is Chris McCandless. What he finds is the intense pull of the wilderness on our imagination, the appeal of high-risk activities to young men. When McCandless's mistakes turn out to be fatal he is dismissed for his naiveté. He was said by some to have a death wish, but wanting to die and wanting to see what one is capable of are too very different things. I began to ask myself if Chris really wasn’t as crazy as some people thought. Then I realized it was quite possible that the reason people thought he was crazy was because he had died trying to fulfill his dream. If he had walked away from his adventure like Krakauer, people would have praised him rather than ridicule. So I asked the question, “How does Krakauer’s life parallel Chris McCandlesses?”
Chris and Jon’s life have many parallels and contrasts at the same time. Both gave up most of their possessions to go after a dream they had. Ones dream was to live off the land in the remote regions of Alaska, the other too climb the Devils Thumb, a mountain peak that had never been scaled by man. Each man was aware of the risks, but were they equally prepared when each began their own adventure? I feel that Chris McCandless was at a disadvantage when he first started off. Raised by a wealthy family and just graduating from Emory University I feel he wasn’t as prepared as he could have been. Fortunately his father had taken him on hiking trips so he was at least somewhat familiar with the wilderness but in no way was he prepared at all for the severity of the Alaskan wilderness. I think it would have been quite a feat just for Chris to have been able to live off the land in a local forest. To be fair to Chris I’m sure Krakauer didn’t start off by just one day deciding he would climb the Devils Thumb after he was inspired by making it up the climbing wall at the local county fair. Both men had to gradually work their way up to a...
... middle of paper ...
...s, the men of the wild frontier” (Wayne 1). This drive, this manifest destiny, “the great pressure of people moving always to new frontiers, in search of new lands, new power, the full freedom of a virgin world, has ruled our course and formed our polices lake a Fate,” (Weinberg 1) is what compelled Jon and Chris to go against the grain of society and follow their dreams. With fewer and fewer “New Frontiers” these two were forced to resort to one of the last unconquered regions of the world, Alaska. It was there that they faced their fears and overcame hardships to succeed.
In conclusion I think that one of the reasons Krakauer decided to write about Chris McCandless is the fact that he found so many disturbing coincidences about his own life that he felt obligated to tell Chris’s story. I think it is quite possible Jon feels guilty about having survived when Chris died. Either way, I think both men were success full even though they both had very different goals and outcomes.
Works Cited
Outdoorclub. 01 Mar. 2005
.
Wayne, Bennett. Men of the Wild Frontier. Champaign: Garrard Publishing
Company, 1968.
Weinberg, Albert. manifest Destiny. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press,
1935.
Who could possibly know that the story of one young man could turn the people of Alaska against him, and others from around the country to rally behind his almost majestic journey. Jon Krakauer set out to get Chris McCandless’s story written in greater depth after his article was ran in the magazine Outside and he received so much mail on that topic that inspired him to do more, more than just Chris’s journey itself. This essay will analyze Jon Krakauer’s book Into The Wild in order to show how well he used the rhetorical analysis concepts and rhetorical appeals.
Almost 24 years ago, Chris McCandless died in unfortunate circumstances. When the news was released that a young man in his early twenties was found dead in the wilderness many people speculated that it was just another hopeless hitchhiker. However this story took a three hundred sixty turn when author Jon Krakauer wrote a lengthy article on McCandless 's death. When the book was later published, the public response was incredible. Even though this happened about 24 years ago Chris McCandless 's death is still argued and discussed today. The events and circumstances leading up to Chris McCandless’s death are what seem to frustrate many readers. As stated in many articles, books, and blogs Chris McCandless died in April 1992 all by himself in
Chris McCandless was still just a young man when he decided to drastically alter his life through the form of a child’s foolishness. However, Chris had not known at the time just how powerful his testimony against his father’s authority, society, or maybe even his own lifestyle was going to be revolutionary throughout not only Alaska,not even the lower 48, but the world. The story of Chris McCandless is a much talked about debate on topics of safety and preparedness in the wild, these things forever associated with the boy who was a little too eager for a death wish. Today, Chris is remember as a fool or a hero. The fool, a boy who allowed himself to be drowned in a fictional world inspired by his readings,dying because he ignored he was just a normal human being or the hero who set out to become something more.
His yearning, in sense, was too powerful to be quenched by human contact. The succor offered by women may have tempted McCandless, but it paled beside the prospect of rough congress with nature, with the cosmos itself. And thus was he drawn north, to Alaska” (66). These clear and intelligent principles of McCandless’s achievable attitude maintained his decision to endeavor into the wilderness because it displays that he was allured to it because of the gratification it would deliver him, one that could not be satisfied by a mere human. Krakauer shifts to his comparisons of other travelers before McCandless. “Reading of the monks, one is moved by their courage, their reckless innocence and their urgency of desire. And with that one can’t help but think of Everett Russ and Chris McCandless,” (Krakauer 97). The author declares this in order to exemplify a similarity of individuals who were in comparable situations like Chris and took the same
HIV is a serious issue that is commonly pushed off and considered an irrelevant topic. In “AIDS, Inc.” by Helen Epstein, the topics of lifestyle brands and government funded organizations were discussed, and provided readers with an understanding of the depths of the disease. The excerpt discusses programs (i.e. loveLife) that had the potential and opportunity to save and inform many lives, but failed to do so, which continues to be a problem today. Our government is capable of helping and educating those who are infected, and anyone who could become infected. Instead of acting like having the disease is something to be ashamed of, governments should fund clinics that provide free HIV testing and free protection to all genders, create a structured
The novel “Into the Wild” by Jon Krakauer goes into great detail to describe the main character, Chris McCandless, who died traveling alone into the Alaskan wilderness. McCandless, whom in the novel renamed himself Alex, left his home and family to travel to Alaska in 1992. In Alaska McCandless planned to live an isolated life in the desolate wilderness, but unfortunately he did not survive. This non-fiction novel portrays his life leading up to his departure and it captures the true essence of what it means to be “in the wild”.
In Jon Krakauer’s non-fiction novel Into the Wild, the well-off, upper-middle-class, Chris McCandless disappears donating all of his savings to charity and hitchhiking to Alaska to live off the land, but 119 days later he is found having starved to death at the age of 24. Chris McCandless was and still is a very heavily discussed topic due to the mysteries his death. His “Great American Odyssey” was short, but lack of divulging his plan to anyone else left it in a shroud of guesswork and minimal evidence. But despite that, there is just enough evidence to show that Chris McCandless was for the most part, at fault for his own death despite good and bad luck along the way.
Living in the wilderness is difficult, but understanding the meaning of such lifestyle is even more difficult. One of the Christopher’s admirable qualities was that he was well aware of what he was doing. He knew about the difficulties and dangers that he would face into the wilderness, and was mentally prepared for that. Author Jon Krakauer says that “McCandless was green, and he overestimated his resilience, but 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 a perilously slim margin for error. He knew precisely what was at stake” (182). McCandless was an educated youth, who loved nature and dreamed of living in the Alaskan wilderness. Although he ignored to take many necessary things with him on this
The Lewis Blackman Case: Ethics, Law, and Implications for the Future Medical errors in decision making that result in harm or death are tragic and costly to the families affected. There are also negative impacts to the medical providers and the associated institutions (Wu, 2000). Patient safety is a cornerstone of higher-quality health care and nurses serve as a communication link in all settings which is critical in surveillance and coordination to reduce adverse outcomes (Mitchell, 2008). The Lewis Blackman Case 1 of 1 point accrued
Through journal entries, highlighted passages, stories of people’s encounters, and personal experiences, author Jon Krakauer attempts to reconstruct the life of a young transcendentalist man named Chris Johnson McCandless in the biographical novel Into the Wild. McCandless was a 24-year-old young man who completely severed his connection to the world, his family, and all of his tangible possessions in hope to survive off the land in Alaska. In the two years that led to his Alaskan Odyssey McCandless created a new life for himself and lived by the name Alexander Supertramp, in hope to leave his old life behind. Krakauer starts his novel “Into the Wild” by bluntly revealing to the audience that he had only survived 113 days and his remains were found two weeks after preceding his death. Rather than focusing on McCandless death, Krakauer focused on his life. Although Krakauer is biased, he proves to be a credible biographer and proves the assertions he made in his authors note.
Jon Krakauer, fascinated by a young man in April 1992 who hitchhiked to Alaska and lived alone in the wild for four months before his decomposed body was discovered, writes the story of Christopher McCandless, in his national bestseller: Into the Wild. McCandless was always a unique and intelligent boy who saw the world differently. Into the Wild explores all aspects of McCandless’s life in order to better understand the reason why a smart, social boy, from an upper class family would put himself in extraordinary peril by living off the land in the Alaskan Bush. McCandless represents the true tragic hero that Aristotle defined. Krakauer depicts McCandless as a tragic hero by detailing his unique and perhaps flawed views on society, his final demise in the Alaskan Bush, and his recognition of the truth, to reveal that pure happiness requires sharing it with others.
Into the Wild, written by John Krakauer tells of a young man named Chris McCandless who 1deserted his college degree and all his worldly possessions in favor of a primitive transient life in the wilderness. Krakauer first told the story of Chris in an article in Outside Magazine, but went on to write a thorough book, which encompasses his life in the hopes to explain what caused him to venture off alone into the wild. McCandless’ story soon became a national phenomenon, and had many people questioning why a “young man from a well-to-do East Coast family [would] hitchhike to Alaska” (Krakauer i). Chris comes from an affluent household and has parents that strived to create a desirable life for him and his sister. As Chris grows up, he becomes more and more disturbed by society’s ideals and the control they have on everyday life. He made a point of spiting his parents and the lifestyle they lived. This sense of unhappiness continues to build until after Chris has graduated college and decided to leave everything behind for the Alaskan wilderness. Knowing very little about how to survive in the wild, Chris ventures off on his adventure in a state of naïveté. It is obvious that he possessed monumental potential that was wasted on romanticized ideals and a lack of wisdom. Christopher McCandless is a unique and talented young man, but his selfish and ultimately complacent attitude towards life and his successes led to his demise.
Another huge ethical topic is the patient’s right to choose autonomy in the refusal of life-saving medicine or treatment. This issue affects a nurse’s standards of care and code of ethics. “The nurse owes the patient a duty of care and must act in accordance with this duty at all times, by respecting and supporting the patient’s right to accept or decline treatment” (Volinsky). In order for a patient to be able make these types of decisions they must first be deemed competent. While the choice of patient’s to refuse life-saving treatment may go against nursing ethical codes and beliefs to attempt and coerce them to get treatment is trespass and would conclude in legal action. “….then refusal of these interventions may be regarded as inappropriate, but in the case of a patient with capacity, the patient must have the ultimate authority to decide” (Volinsky). While my values of the worth of life and importance of action may be different than others, as a nurse I have to learn to set that aside and follow all codes of ethics whether I have a dilemma with them or not. Sometimes with ethics there is no right or wrong, but as a nurse we have to figure out where to draw the line in some cases.
Ethics is defined as moral principles that govern a persons or a group’s behavior, ethical principles apply to both personal and professional relationships (Webster, 2015). The field of nursing is a profession that has been highly regarded and respected in society. Most nurses enter the profession in order to utilize their clinical skills to help others in their time of need. Those in failing health rely on nurses to care for them in their most vulnerable states, and expect a level of compassion and humanity while receiving care. Nurses have an ethical responsibility to their patients, clients, and their community. Compassion, empathy, and integrity are staple characteristics that nurses possess that allow them to successfully perform their
He believed he should be brought up to be an heir to the royal throne. The king clearly had a different view of the donkey, being grateful that their wishes had finally been granted he demanded they raise the child in the form of a donkey like they would raise the most normal child they had assumed they would have had once these hopes and wishes were answered. “The donkey, therefor, was brought up and grew bigger, and his ears grew up beautifully high and straight. He was, however of a merry disposition, jumped about, played, and had an especial pleasure in music” (The Donkey, para 1). This piece of evidence shows that the donkey tried many times to fit in so much he learned to play the lute even after being given excuses of why he wouldn’t be able to learn to play from the musician. It also shows another example of theme which is never giving up. The donkey wouldn’t give up until he had accomplished what he had set his mind