What is your most immense goal in life? Becoming a professional sports athlete? Maybe a world renowned surgeon? Or possibly proving to yourself that you are tenacious enough to survive alone in the bittery raw Alaskan wilds. In the novel, Into the Wild, by Jon Krakauer, the biography of Christopher Johnson McCandless is revealed through a series of journal entries and first hand encounters. Krakauer uses his similar experience as support to argue McCandless was not an arrogant reckless narcissist---as some conclude---but was courageous in pursuing his inmost aspiration. Some presume that Krakauer is not qualified to give an objective opinion because of his own bias, yet Krakauer is absolutely qualified. Krakauer’s capability to relate and understand
…show more content…
From meager relationships with their fathers to sheer physical resemblance, the similarities are ascertained. Throughout the novel Krakauer stresses the relationship between Christopher McCandless and his father, Walt McCandless. Walt is a driven, business savvy, educated man---possibly a womanizer. He was much more driven by financial status than Chris ever was. Krakauer and his father shared similar discrepancies, although he mentioned his father much less. Krakauer writes, “But I believe we were similarly affected by the skewed relationships we had with our fathers. And I suspect we had a similar intensity, a similar heedlessness, a similar agitation of the soul” (155). Both Krakauer and McCandless began their love for outdoor adventures at a young age. Their excelled performance in school began young as well. Krakauer 's ability to be in McCandless’s position allows for a complete and true understanding of McCandless. Krakauer’s opinion becomes more reliable and supported. Yet the differences between McCandless and Krakauer become a key factor in the qualification of Krakauer as …show more content…
Yet a young courageous man following his aspirations. Although some argue that Krakauer is not qualified to provide an objective opinion on the subject, due to any bias that may have been apparent throughout the novel, Krakauer is utterly and absolutely qualified. His bias is not portrayed in the novel, which is the job of any good writer. His extended research and interviews with all who knew McCandless makes Krakauer possibly the most competent person to give an opinion about McCandless. Krakauer and McCandless share many personal characteristics and experiences involving poor relationships with their fathers, some presume this is what designates Krakauer as unqualified. Contradictingly, this aids Krakauer’s case. He has been through a lot of what McCandless went through and knows how it feels, yet never took his expedition to the extent McCandless had. Krakauer’s qualification and ability to relate gives the reader a better trust of the author and the information. It gives Krakauer motivation as well. He clearly sees himself in McCandless, therefore wanted to tell his story to the best of his
From meager relationships with their fathers to sheer physical resemblance, the similarities are ascertained. Throughout the novel Krakauer stresses the relationship between Christopher McCandless and his father, Walt McCandless. Walt is a driven, business savvy, educated man---possibly a womanizer. He was much more driven by financial status than Chris ever was. Krakauer and his father shared similar discrepancies, although he mentioned his father much less. Krakauer writes, “But I believe we were similarly affected by the skewed relationships we had with our fathers. And I suspect we had a similar intensity, a similar heedlessness, a similar agitation of the soul” (155). Both Krakauer and McCandless began their love for outdoor adventures at a young age. Their excelled performance in school began young as well. Krakauer 's ability to be in McCandless’s position allows for a complete and true understanding of McCandless. Krakauer’s opinion becomes more reliable and supported. Yet the differences between McCandless and Krakauer become a key factor in the qualification of Krakauer as …show more content…
Yet a young courageous man following his aspirations. Although some argue that Krakauer is not qualified to provide an objective opinion on the subject, due to any bias that may have been apparent throughout the novel, Krakauer is utterly and absolutely qualified. His bias is not portrayed in the novel, which is the job of any good writer. His extended research and interviews with all who knew McCandless makes Krakauer possibly the most competent person to give an opinion about McCandless. Krakauer and McCandless share many personal characteristics and experiences involving poor relationships with their fathers, some presume this is what designates Krakauer as unqualified. Contradictingly, this aids Krakauer’s case. He has been through a lot of what McCandless went through and knows how it feels, yet never took his expedition to the extent McCandless had. Krakauer’s qualification and ability to relate gives the reader a better trust of the author and the information. It gives Krakauer motivation as well. He clearly sees himself in McCandless, therefore wanted to tell his story to the best of his