Analysis Of Chris Mccandless In Into The Wild, By Jon Krakauer

A good portion of Into the Wild, by Jon Krakauer, focuses on the characterization of the protagonist, Chris McCandless. Krakauer shares his opinions on Chris frequently throughout the duration of his book. Chris is portrayed through anecdotes told by people who knew him and through Krakauer’s own personal relation to him. Through these two methods the reader is given a very clear image of Chris. Into the Wild, focuses a lot on Chris’s youth and especially how that influenced his decisions. Krakauer compares Chris’ leneincey on his literary heres versus his harsh judgments on his parents. Chris’ tense relationships with his parents are also used to help show how young Chris really is. After Chris’ youth is made apparent to the reader Krakauer

shares his own adventures and asks the reader to relate to Chris. Youth is made a central motive in Chris’ adventures and the reader is asked to forgive Chris for this and appreciate his journey.
Chris is very lenient on his idols: London, Thoreau and Tolstoy.

All three writers influenced Chris immensely with the aesthetic movement. He reread Call of The Wild by London repeatedly, creating an image of the Alaskan wilderness that fueled him to go in the first place. He admired Tolstoy’s values on celibacy and living in simplicity and Thoreau’s poetry on living away from society and in the wild. He found validity in their works. Krakauer comments that, “He was also able to forgive, or overlook, the shortcomings of his literary heroes” (Krakauer 122). Willfully, Chris disregarded that none of these men practiced what they preached: London died at home overweight; Tolstoy was anything but celibate; and Thoreau lived a stone’s throw from civilization. This shows the characteristic youth that Chris kept with him into his mid-twenties. While Krakauer asks the reader forgive Chris, he does empathize Chris’ altruism and

rigidity.
Krakauer show’s Chris’ youth with his righteous opinions on what is right and wrong. Chris desired to do good in the world and make a difference. When he left on his road trip after college he decided to donate his money. He loathed the idea that anyone could go hungry so when it came to donating his leftover college fund he left it with OXFAM, an organization devoted to ending world hunger. At the same time, he also expected those around him to feel similarly, “He measured himself and those around him by an impossibly rigorous moral code” (Krakauer 122). In high school, he spent evenings in the streets of Washington DC giving out food and seeing how homeless people get by. He expected one of his friends to come with him to smuggle weapons into South Africa and join the struggle to end the apartheid. When his friend declined the proposition, Chris remarked harshly, “Oh, so I guess you just don’t care about right and wrong” (Krakauer 113). Krakauer makes it clear through these stories of Chris’ youth that he had a very black and white view of the world. In a characteristically youthful desire to separate what is evil from what is right, Chris passed harsh judgments on people. Chris judged his parents the harshest out of anyone.
Chris is portrayed as very critical of his parents and excessively angry.

Chris refused to confront his mother and father and instead repressed his emotions. Krakauer shows his influence with this comment, “Children can be harsh judges when it comes to their parents, disinclined to grant clemency, and this was especially true in Chris’s case” (Krakauer 122). He makes it very clear that Chris is really just a kid, and therefore, liable to make decisions that are rash or immature. Krakauer makes it clear that he thinks Chris’ opinions on his parents might have changed over time, had he lived. Chris was simply a kid who had been wronged by those who were supposed to protect him. All of Chris’ repressed emotions eventually came to the surface, “Chris kept careful score. And over time he worked himself into a choler of self-righteous indignation that was impossible to keep bottles up” (Krakauer 122). Chris eventually lashed out in the way that lots of children do, he ran away. His options were limited, he could either talk to his parents or a therapist about it or flee. His choice of fleeing shows that he really was working through something. By running away Chris broadcasts his youth and also makes the reader curious as to if he might have come back and worked out his issues eventually. The contradictions in Chris’ severe opinions of those around him show his youth, and inspire’s readers to be more

lenient.
Krakauer also gives the reader a depiction of his own youthful adventures to help them further understand Chris’s naivety and youth. Krakauer gives a detailed account of his own track up the Devil’s Thumb in Alaska when he was 23. He discusses his motivations and own personal agenda in relation to Chris’s. It is evident that both the author and Chris share the same youthful energy that drives people to do things that an older more developed person would think twice about. The reader gleans a look into Chris’ mindset and it allows Krakauer to draw conclusions. Krakauer muses, “It is easy, when you’re young, to believe that what you desire is no less than what you deserve, to assume that if you want something badly enough, it is your God-given right to have it” (Krakauer 155). Chris is young and overwhelmingly invested in everything he gets involved with. He wants to live in Alaska, to find peace within himself like his idols wrote about. He is zealous about it and sure that his way is the right way. He is under the impression that if he just believes hard enough, he will be able to accomplish his ultimate goal, surviving in Alaska. There is no evidence that his Alaskan excursion was anything but a glorious adventure. Krakauer asks that we appreciate his determination, his naivety and most of all his youth. He asks that we forgive Chris, the same way we would forgive the kid who drank too much or drove too fast.
More than relating himself to Chris, Krakauer also designates his reader with the responsibility of relating their youthful choices to Chris’. Everyone takes risks, especially when they are young. The difference, Krakauer argues, is that Chris’ risks were a little less common. Krakauer directly connects other youthful risks people in their early twenty-something take to Chris’. “It can be argued that youthful derring-do is in fact evolutionarily adaptive, a behavior encoded in our genes. McCandless, in his fashion, merely took risk-taking to its logical extreme” (Krakauer 182). He brings up war, drinking too much, driving too fast, and other reckless, more acceptable youthful indiscretions. This allows the reader see themselves in Chris. Krakauer also includes reflections from his friend, Roman. “‘I guess I just can’t help identifying with the guy.’ Roman allows as he pokes the coals with a stick. ‘I hate to admit it, but not so many years ago it could easily have been me in the same kind of predicament’” (Krakauer 185). The same predicament that, in Chris’ case turned out fatal. This method of writing makes it harder to pass harsh black and white judgements on Chris and makes the reader want to cut him some slack.
Throughout Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer makes his opinions on Chris obvious. He wants the reader to understand that even though Chris took risks that ultimately cost him his life that he was not evil. His intention was not to self-destruct in the wild; he was just young. The reader must forgive Chris, the same way the reader would want to be forgiven. Krakauer finds worth in Chris’ journey. Even though the story ends in death, Krakauer wants his audience to walk away with a little bit of awe for Chris. Personally, I agree with Krakauer. It is not my place to judge, safe with modern comforts, with no idea or way of relating to what Chris survived in Mexico and later in Alaska. It is certainly not my place to judge how Chris reacted to his parents' betrayal. Looking at his life from an outsider’s point of view gives me a lot of room to pass harsh judgments on Chris and how he behaved in certain situations. I like to think I would handle wrongdoings done to me with grace. That I would persevere and have the last word. Speculation is worthless unless I experience what Chris did. His style of presenting Chris as a rugged youth gives the reader all the images to perhaps grant him some leeway and forgiveness.