In the work INTO The Wild by Jon Krakauer Chris Mccandless is willing to go on a daring adventure to hike across the country to go up to alaska and live in the wilderness. I am going to prove that chris was a good person and valued a lot of stuff but he wanted to do a daring adventure and it got him into trouble In the end . By making three main points: chris’ value of nature, his value for what he had and, his caring personality. One thing we can learn from these examples is you can still be a good person and value things no matter where you come from or what you look like.
This paragraph is going to be about Chris’ value of nature and how he lived off the land because he had no money. To chris Nature was his friend. This relates to the main claim because he valued nature so much he lived off of it so it would not be a true adventure and not just an adventure through the country. Krakauer writes “ … berries collecting them in a gallon milk jug with the top cut off “ ( 30). In other words chris was living off the land struggling to survive because he did not know what plants were poisonous and what plants were edible. This supports my claim that Mccandless was living off the land trying to stay alive. …show more content…
Here is a supporting example: As Krakauer writes “ one hundred twenty- three dollars in legal tender promptly reduced to ash and smoke”(24). This supports my claim that he wanted to live off the land and not what people gave him because he set all the money he had at first on fire to keep him warm thinking he wouldn’t need it later in life. This helps the readers learn he truly wanted to live off the
This paragraph is going to be about Chris’ value of nature and how he lived off the land because he had no money. To chris Nature was his friend. This relates to the main claim because he valued nature so much he lived off of it so it would not be a true adventure and not just an adventure through the country. Krakauer writes “ … berries collecting them in a gallon milk jug with the top cut off “ ( 30). In other words chris was living off the land struggling to survive because he did not know what plants were poisonous and what plants were edible. This supports my claim that Mccandless was living off the land trying to stay alive. …show more content…
Here is a supporting example: As Krakauer writes “ one hundred twenty- three dollars in legal tender promptly reduced to ash and smoke”(24). This supports my claim that he wanted to live off the land and not what people gave him because he set all the money he had at first on fire to keep him warm thinking he wouldn’t need it later in life. This helps the readers learn he truly wanted to live off the