Chris Mccandless In Into The Wild
Throughout Into the Wild Jon Krakauer seems to identify with Chris McCandless quite a bit,
whether he’s talking about his own trips into the Alaskan wilderness, or the many others who
have died doing the same as Chris. Krakauer uses quotes from people with the same view as him
and stories of others to make the reader feel sympathetic towards McCandless. Krakauer appears
to be quite fond of McCandless and thinks that it was chance, more than anything else, that was
responsible for Chris’s death.
Perhaps the most obvious example of Krakauer’s identification with McCandless is when
Krakauer likens McCandless’ trip into the wild to his own trip into Alaska. “But my sense of
Chris McCandless’s intentions comes, too, from a more …show more content…
A pilgrim, perhaps.” (60). The next
chapter is spent chronicling the end of the journey of Everett Ruess, whom Krakauer considers to
share more similarities to McCandless than any other who died in the wilderness. At the end of
this chapter Krakauer likens both Ruess and McCandless to monks living on Iceland who fled to
Greenland when Iceland was settled by others, risking their lives just to find a place where they
could be alone “Reading of these monks, one can’t help thinking of Everett Ruess and Chris
McCandless.” (Krakauer 68). By comparing McCandless to monks who fled their land in order
to find peace and loneliness Krakauer definitely makes him appear as someone with a noble and
perhaps misunderstood cause.
Krakauer spends the last couple of chapters discussing Chris’s last days. He talks about how
McCandless died, eventually coming to the conclusion that he was most likely poisoned by wild
potato seeds. By stating that he was killed by poison rather than simply starving Krakauer makes
the reader place the blame more on chance or bad luck, more so than McCandless’s ill-
preparedness or overconfidence. This causes the reader to be more sympathetic towards
whether he’s talking about his own trips into the Alaskan wilderness, or the many others who
have died doing the same as Chris. Krakauer uses quotes from people with the same view as him
and stories of others to make the reader feel sympathetic towards McCandless. Krakauer appears
to be quite fond of McCandless and thinks that it was chance, more than anything else, that was
responsible for Chris’s death.
Perhaps the most obvious example of Krakauer’s identification with McCandless is when
Krakauer likens McCandless’ trip into the wild to his own trip into Alaska. “But my sense of
Chris McCandless’s intentions comes, too, from a more …show more content…
A pilgrim, perhaps.” (60). The next
chapter is spent chronicling the end of the journey of Everett Ruess, whom Krakauer considers to
share more similarities to McCandless than any other who died in the wilderness. At the end of
this chapter Krakauer likens both Ruess and McCandless to monks living on Iceland who fled to
Greenland when Iceland was settled by others, risking their lives just to find a place where they
could be alone “Reading of these monks, one can’t help thinking of Everett Ruess and Chris
McCandless.” (Krakauer 68). By comparing McCandless to monks who fled their land in order
to find peace and loneliness Krakauer definitely makes him appear as someone with a noble and
perhaps misunderstood cause.
Krakauer spends the last couple of chapters discussing Chris’s last days. He talks about how
McCandless died, eventually coming to the conclusion that he was most likely poisoned by wild
potato seeds. By stating that he was killed by poison rather than simply starving Krakauer makes
the reader place the blame more on chance or bad luck, more so than McCandless’s ill-
preparedness or overconfidence. This causes the reader to be more sympathetic towards