Rhetorical Analysis Of Into The Wild, By Jon Krakauer

1321 Words3 Pages

In January of 1993, the first article was released on Christopher McCandless, a twenty-four-year-old intent on surviving alone in the Alaskan wilderness. This account was written by Jon Krakauer, and later expanded into a novel, Into the Wild, outlining McCandless’ early life, journey, and travels, up until he died in Alaska, with research and interviews from people connected to him throughout his time. Twenty years later, in September of 2013, the Anchorage Daily News released an article, “The beatification of Chris McCandless: From thieving poacher into a saint” written by Craig Medred, a former writer for the Daily News. Medred’s opinionated article could never, in any way, be considered a legitimate accounting of the life of Chris McCandless. Medred’s article …show more content…

Medred uses immature language and, sloppy writing style, and is just generally dismissive of nearly every point he brings up in Mason’s. This theme of distasteful writing is seen across nearly every article he has published and is just another reason piling onto the heap is his incompetence. In Medred’s original response to Mason’s tribute to McCandless, “Examining Chris McCandless, 20 years after he went 'Into the Wild',” he writes several shallow digs towards Mason’s character, including: “What the hell has become of the young men of America that someone like Mason, an apparently educated person, writes like this.Mason is so beyond clueless here it is shocking.” Medred writes with such authority and superiority with little to no factual evidence to back him up. He uses his pretentious opinions as though they hold weight, parading around a conflated sense of self-importance. Mason replies to Medred’s response in a very diplomatic fashion, reaching out and contacting him, pointing out his discrepancies calmly and respectfully, “I had long sought a dialogue with someone who had an opposing view of Chris

Open Document