What Is Krakauer's Critique Of Into The Wild

The novel, Into The Wild, written by Jon Krakauer, provides a professional insight into Chris McCandless’s one-hundred-thirteen day rogue dissonance from society, meaning, abandoning his possessions, car, money, and even his well-to-do family. Many consider McCandless’s voyage as intriguing or inspiring. However, I believe McCandless’s actions are egotistically and ideologically driven for the same reasons Krakauer wrote the novel, for the benefit of their own self-interest. Krakauer provides the reader a disservice while writing McCandless’s adventure because the author's writing illuminates an ethically complex bias, which ultimately turned McCandless into a product and a tourist phenomenon. Consequently, Krakauer made a substantial profit, and allowed the wilderness, a place McCandless was attempting to preserve, to become extinct.
Krakauer’s hypocrisy was shown when he wrote about, “McCandless’s hubris and the dumb mistakes he made - the two or three readily avoidable blunders that ended up costing him his life” (185). I believe Krakauer has no authority to critique McCandless in such matter because he never had the same experience as McCandless, and I am sure Krakauer would have made those same “mistakes” if he were on the same journey. When Krakauer says McCandless’s mistakes were “readily avoidable” it exemplifies his condescending remarks by establishing himself as a more intelligent human, and a power dynamic blossomed by making McCandless the antagonist through Krakauer’s language. (Insert concluding