Choosing a side of someone’s story that you don’t know. After reading their story, you will form your own opinion. Jon Krakauer wrote Chris McCandless’s story, Into The Wild, shining the light on both sides of the people’s opinions about him. When the news came out in the paper about Chris’s death, many people thought he was a reckless wacko, while others thought he was courageous in going out into the wild. Chris was not prepared in any way possible for what he was going to get himself into. Being as stubborn and naive as he was, he still went and pursued it. McCandless was an intelligent man. He always excelled academically, while also being the cross-country team captain. He would spend the majority of his time on his lonesome. He always …show more content…
A real big difference. You’d have to be pretty stupid not to be able to tell them apart” (Krakauer 177). In reality, McCandless had no idea what he was doing. All he knew was that he needed nutrition. That was not enough to save him up there. “Not only did McCandless die because he was stupid, one Alaska correspondent observed, but ‘the scope of his self-styled adventure was so small as to ring pathetic–squatting in a wrecked bus a few miles out of Healy, potting jays and squirrels, mistaking a caribou for a moose (pretty hard to do).... Only one word for the guy: incompetent” (Krakauer 177). Chris was not meant to be up there. If he had left the bus, and continued his trip, he could have lived. He was incompetent and did not try to get over the river. Despite Chris’s intelligence, it did not help him in the wild. As stubborn as he was, he tried to do everything his way and it led him to his death. He went to one of the harshest environments, unprepared, mentally and physically. Not having the right equipment to sustain himself, and going around in circles back to the bus, which essentially was his home. He should have never gone to Alaska, but his reckless delusion made him believe he’d make
...en writing a book based on ethos, logos and pathos, it is very challenging for an author to stay completely objective. In Krakauer’s case, his bias comes out strongly in certain chapters, sometimes detracting from his argument. Some faults exist in his credibility and logic, but his use of emotional appeal makes up for what those areas lack. Krakauer does an excellent job developing the character of Chris McCandless. The author brings him back to life with his descriptions and is able to make him tangible to the reader. The discussion over what McCandless's thoughts were when he went on his fatal trek will continue as long as his memory lasts. Ultimately, the readers of Into the Wild are left to form their opinion of McCandless, with Krakauer nudging them along the way.
People make bad choices in life every day, some may be recovered from whereas others have fatal consequences. A reporter named Jon Krakauer wrote a biography called Into The Wild which is about a young man named Chris McCandless who makes a fatal decision which lead to his demise in Alaska. Aron Ralton's book called Between a Rock and a Hard Place is about his near death experience from making a bad choice. His perseverance and problem solving skills become his salvation in the hot and dry terrain of Utah. Chris and Aron were both eager for adventure and both had a love for nature and the outdoors. Chris died because he lacked Aron's prior knowledge of survival tactics, making Chris ill prepared for his journey.
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.
The epigraphs presented by Krakauer before each chapter of the memoir Into the Wild dive deep into the life of Chris McCandless before and after his journey into the Alaskan wilderness. They compare him to famous “coming of age characters” and specific ideas written by some of his favorite philosophers. These give the reader a stronger sense of who Chris was and why he made the decision to ultimately walk alone into the wild.
Throughout Into the Wild, Krakauer portrays Christopher McCandless as an infallibly eager young man hoping to distance himself from the society he so obviously loathes, to "live off the land," entirely independent of a world which has "conditioned [itself] to a life of security." Chris, contrarily to this depiction, is disparagingly viewed by some as a "reckless idiot" who lacked the sense he needed to survive in the Alaskan wilderness. This derogatory assessment of Chris's mindset is representative of the society he hopes to escape and contains all the ignorance that causes him to feel this way. Nevertheless, he is misjudged by these critics, allowing Krakauer to hold the more accurate interpretation of Chris's character, his goals, and his accomplishments.
In 1992, Christopher McCandless set off on an odyssey into the backcountry of Alaska, an adventure that had proved fatal. After McCandless's corpse was found, Jon Krakauer wrote an article on the story of Chris McCandless, which was released in the January 1993 issue of Outside magazine. The article had received a negative response; several readers criticized McCandless for being foolish and ill-prepared, and showed no sympathy or remorse for his death. McCandless has been referred to as a nut, a kook, and a fool. However, McCandless was not a nonsensical man. In 1996, Jon Krakauer's novel, Into the Wild, was published. The novel uncovers more detail of McCandless's story. Into the Wild rebuts the idea of McCandless being someone who is foolish, and speaks of the many occasions where McCandless has demonstrated great perseverance and determination. The novel also proves the intelligence of McCandless, and brings insight into McCandless's psyche. The following examples will illustrate how McCandless was not a fool, but someone to admire.
“Never judge a book by it's cover.” This statement is heard hundreds of times throughout one's life, but for some reason it is a natural reaction to do just the opposite. The notion should not have a pre thought opinion of someone because of the way they look or the things they do is baffling to some individuals. Chris McCandless, the main character of the novel “Into The Wild” by Jon Krakauer, is a victim of this scenario. In the Novel, Chris McCandless leaves the comfort of the “perfect” life that he has been given to live an independent life on the road. With no money and his own two feet, McCandless travels the country in hopes of eventually making it to Alaska to live off the land in the bush. As the reader moves through the book, they
Life is a form of progress- from one stage to another, from one responsibility to another. Studying, getting good grades, and starting the family are common expectations of human life. In the novel Into the Wild, author Jon Krakauer introduced the tragic story of Christopher Johnson McCandless. After graduating from Emory University, McCandless sold of his possessions and ultimately became a wanderer. He hitchhiked to Alaska and walked into the wilderness for nearly 4 months. This journey to the 49th state proved fatal for him, and he lost his life while fulfilling his dream. After reading this novel, some readers admired the boy for his courage and noble ideas, while others fulminated that he was an idiot who perished out of arrogance and
Chris McCandless was a graduate from college whose dream was to go into the Alaskan wilderness and live there to get an overall experience of living off the land. McCandless wanted to experience how to hunt and gather everything that he needed to live in the Alaskan Wilderness. However was it a good idea when Mccandless went into the wild. Many people on his adventure tried to help him by giving him some equipment or buy him some because he wasn't prepared for his adventure. After McCandless’s death to this date people would say that McCandless is an idiot or stupid for not being prepared for the Alaskan wilderness.
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.
Into the Wild, written by Jon Krakauer, is the story of a young man named Christopher Johnson McCandless who ventured off to Alaska and tried to survive in the wild. McCandless grew up in Annandale, Virginia where he attended school and made very good grades, rarely bringing home anything below an A. His father, Walt worked for NASA for a little while, before starting his own business with Chris’s mother, Billie, out of their own home. They worked hard and for long hours to get the business up and running and it finally paid off. The McCandless family was wealthy, but had many emotional problems. After graduating from Emory University in 1990, Chris McCandless donated twenty-four thousand dollars from his savings account to charity, changed his name to Alexander Supertramp, and then disappeared. This book tells the story of his life and travels. Some critics say that Chris McCandless was a very admirable person. He was a brave man that followed his dreams. However, given all of his flaws, attitudes, and actions, he is un-admirable. McCandless walked into the wild very unprepared and stubborn. He also treated his family poorly as well as anyone who got emotionally close to him. Chris was additionally too impressionable in a way that he admired authors along with the books they wrote, and tried to imitate them. He was very rebellious in his actions as well, and did not try to change the world or help others.
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.
Chris McCandless is regarded as being something as a spiritual figure almost as a cult hero, some call him a disillusioned fool, some call him a great adventurer, and the debate still continues. As Matthew Power calls in his article, an article where he tells the story of McCandless,“The debate falls into two camps: Krakauer's visionary seeker, the tragic hero who dared to live the unmediated life he had dreamed of and died trying; or, as many Alaskans see it, the unprepared fool, a greenhorn who had fundamentally misjudged the wilderness he'd wanted so desperately to commune with.” Like so many stories covering Christopher McCandless’ death, both ends of the argument are discussed in an unfavored manner in the hopes to help develop an opinion on the McCandless story. This open ended question can only be answered open-endedly based on what the readers base for themselves as covered stories intend. Like Power has done, ...
In Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer explores the human fascination with the purpose of life and nature. Krakauer documents the life and death of Chris McCandless, a young man that embarked on an Odyssey in the Alaskan wilderness. Like many people, McCandless believed that he could give his life meaning by pursuing a relationship with nature. He also believed that rejecting human relationships, abandoning his materialistic ways, and purchasing a book about wildlife would strengthen his relationship with nature. However, after spending several months enduring the extreme conditions of the Alaskan wilderness, McCandless’ beliefs begin to work against him. He then accepts that he needs humans, cannot escape materialism, and can never fully understand how nature functions. Most importantly, he realizes that human relationships are more valuable than infinite solitude. McCandless’ gradual change of heart demonstrates that exploring the wilderness is a transformative experience. Krakauer uses the life and death of Chris McCandless to convey that humans need to explore nature in order to discover the meaning of life.
Although Mill’s points seem to be on a course of a reliable ethical principle, there are however flaws to be found in utilitarianism. Utilizing utilitarianism as a society's primary doctrine would prove to be unfavorable in many circumstances. Utilitarianism is flawed if implemented in the system of equity or justice as unfair sacrifices for the goal of the greatest-happiness would arise and diminish people’s chances of receiving true fairness. Innocents may be penalized based on the ethical conclusion that utilitarianism could draw. This is not a demonstration of true justice as punishing the innocent is a violation of one’s rights and would be considered as a form of injustice. Utilitarianism takes a flawed approach in measuring happiness