A Rhetorical Analysis Essay On Into The Wild

The general argument made by the author, Henry David Thoreau, in his work Where I Lived, and What I Lived For is that humans need to change their routine lifestyles. More specifically, the author argues in paragraph 7 that individuals need to live in pure nature. He writes, “If we are really dying, let us hear the rattle in our throat and feel cold in the extremities,” (280). In this passage, the author is suggesting that humans need to abandon their industrial lifestyles and go back to our prehistoric roots. In conclusion, the author’s belief is nature prevails anything modern society can build up. In my view, the author is partly right because humans need to experience nature firsthand. More specifically, I believe that we can’t blindly

turn our eyes away from the Earth’s wonders. For example, as technology advances, the Earth loses more and more of its natural land, and so becomes more synthetic. However, the author might object that I believe humans are permitted to live in artificial environments, but I maintain we need to go out and experience the elements at times. Therefore, I conclude that we can live in cities and industrial environments, but we need to occasionally go out and experience the world for ourselves.
In paragraph 7 of Where I Lived, and What I Lived For Thoreau emphasizes that “Let us spend one day as deliberately as Nature, and not be thrown off the track by every nutshell and mosquito’s wing that falls on the rails,” (280).

He essentially enforces the readers to live in absolute nature in order to live their lives to the fullest. Christopher McCandless follows this ideal throughout the novel, Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer. In Into the Wild, a young McCandless embarks on a significant journey to Alaska. Throughout the way, he abandons his family, identity, money, and his car in order to “live off the land” in the Alaskan wilderness. However, this ultimately led to McCandless’ demise, when his body was found dead on September 6, 1992, on the Stampede Trail. The cause of death was ruled to be as starvation, which brings me to my main point. In a world where technology is constantly taking over our lives, individuals should experience nature firsthand sometimes. However, purely living off the land as Thoreau suggests, is severely consequential. Even for experienced outdoorsman such as McCandless risk their lives to live in the isolation of pure nature, and it’s truly costly. So, I don't endorse this extreme

lifestyle.
Thoreau continues this paragraph with a question.

He asks, “Why should we knock under and go with the stream?” (280), meaning “why should we follow society's rules?”. This questioning of normality can be seen throughout history: Martin Luther King Jr., George Washington, Susan B. Anthony, Mahatma Gandhi, etc. These are all respected leaders who rebelled against their society’s rules and led change for the betterment of future generations. Even leaders of pop culture such as John Lennon and Prince chose not to abide by society’s standards. It’s perfectly acceptable for individuals to challenge the rules presented to them. It’s what makes people unique. If everyone were to follow the rules, we would be living in a robotic world where no significant change to our ways of living would

occur.
Thoreau continues paragraph 7 with the statement, “If the engine whistles, let it whistle till it is hoarse for its pains. If the bell rings, why should we run? We will consider what kind of music they are like,” (280). Thoreau informs the reader that they have to be open-minded and they should think independently. They shouldn’t be peer pressured to follow age-old traditions. Individuals need to form their own feelings about topics and subjects without biased interruption. Princess Diana of Wales did exactly this in her lifetime. Diana often didn’t treat herself as a princess because she broke royal protocol dozens of times. She opened up about herself, discussing the struggles she had while suffering from bulimia. Diana also shocked the world when she shook hands with an HIV positive patient and visited Brazilian AIDS orphans in April 1987, when the disease was very misunderstood and stigmatized. Us humans need to follow what we feel is best for ourselves, even if the majority claims we’re incorrect. We simply need to go with our gut in certain situations and break tradition if we feel like it.
Overall, Thoreau was rhetorically effective in his argument about how humans should live in the wilderness. However, his views may have been a bit extreme, since living in nature can have serious consequences. Nonetheless, he made effective points that can be applied to the modern age today.