Into the Wild by J. Krakauer - Book Report/Review Example

Into the Wild 2007 In the introduction to Into the Wild, Jon confesses: “I was haunted by the particulars of the boys starvation and by vague, unsettling parallels between events in his life and those in my own.” In 1996 Jon Krakauer, well-known journalist, publishes a book describing a story which happened a couple years ago with a young man who chose a life of danger and freedom. The story of Christopher McCandless, a young idealist, who decided to go into the wilderness and live off the land, turned out to be tragic for him. In April 1992 the honours graduate of Emory University from a well-to-do family was found starved to death in the school bus in Alaska taiga. His decomposed body was found by hunters. In his death notes he asked desperately to save him. This life story fascinated a journalist Jon Krakauer so much that after writing an article about Chris, he extended it into a book reconstructing the last two years of McCandlesss life using his journals, postcards and interviews with people who knew him. The story of is very close to the life of the author himself. Krakauer also hitchhiked to Alaska at the same age as Chris was. He was the same thrilled with prospect of getting into wilderness. Jon set to climb the Devils Thumb which was the same dangerous as Chris’ journey. However, he was not aware of the dangers the same way McCandless was not. Chris starts his travelling in a search of a new life, ‘one in which he would be free to wallow in unfiltered experience.’ (p. 23) The same way Krakauer once tried to make a change in his life: “… I thought climbing Devil’s Thumb would fix all that was wrong with my life. In the end, of course it changed almost nothing. (p.155) Krakauer realizes that his luck could turn wrong for him and he could end up the same way as McCandless did. Krakauer writes: “The fact that I survived my Alaskan adventure and McCandless did not survive his was largely a matter of chance; had I died on the Stikine Ice Cap in 1977, people would have been quick to say of me, as they now say of him, that I had a death wish.” (p.155) In these lines the reader feels how Krakauer parallels his life experience to that of McCandless. What did not happen to him, happened to the same idealistic young man who ignored the pleas of his family and friends and was the same obsessed with ‘peering over the brink.’ Jon Krakauer was the same thrilled by ‘sight of something in the glimpse, some forbidden and elemental riddle.’ (p.156) and it is the bond that unites idealistic youth of the present and the past. Many may deride the death of McCandless for his arrogance and self-reliance, his ill-equipment - ‘his gear seemed exceedingly minimal for the harsh conditions of the interior’ ‘cheap leather hiking boots’, rifle of .22 caliber , ‘no ax, no bug dope, no snowshoes, and no compass’ and his reluctance to accept help - “Gallien offered to drive Alex all the way to Anchorage, buy him some decent gear, and then drive him back to wherever he wanted to go.” His answer was: “No, thanks anyway, Ill be fine with what Ive got.” (p.4) However, the author seems to be understanding and sympathetic towards his character. In the introduction Krakauer writes: “I inevitably came to reflect on other, larger subjects as well: the grip wilderness has on the American imagination, the allure high-risk activities hold for young men of a certain mind, the complicated, highly charged bond that exists between fathers and sons.” Krakauer uses experience from his own youth to explain the behaviour of Chris McCandless. In the introduction he confides: “I interrupt McCandless story with fragments of a narrative drawn from my own youth. I do so in the hope that my experiences will throw some oblique light on the enigma of Chris McCandless.” There are much in common between the author and his character. When setting to the trip to Alaska Krakauer was the same passionate youth reading much of philosophy books as he puts it ‘a literary diet overly rich in the work of Nietzsche…’ (p.135) as who admired McCandless Tolstoy for how ‘the great novelist had forsaken the life of wealth and privilege to wander among the destitute…’ During his journey McCandless carried with him the volumes Thoreau, Tolstoy and Gogol. He was smart and intelligent using ‘big words,’ not the fool to challenge the death, ‘a real sharp fella’ who got into trouble due ‘too much thinking.’ McCandless just ‘possessed a streak of stubborn idealism which did not mesh readily with modern existence’ and it was what united both men- young Krakauer and McCandless. The author writes: “I suspect we had a similar intensity, a similar heedlessness, a similar agitation of the soul.” This agitation and belief in ideals is common for both Krakauer and McCandless. They both owned ‘inherited off-kilter ambition’ which kept them going their way and reaching their peaks. Krakauer was initially excited with the story which happened to a young man who had his own vision of life and lived it up. The author felt some kind of inner bond between himself and McCandless. He saw McCandless as his own reflection – the same passionate and agitated man Jon was at 20. He tried to do the same reckless things as McCandless to change his life. He risked his life the same way as McCandless did. He was the same thrilled with philosophic ideas. Both have much in common. In the story of McCandless’ wandering, the reader sees some part of Jon Krakauer. The reader also sees other young American men who are the same excited about breaking stereotypes and living their life as their heart desires. References Krakauer J. Into the Wild. Anchor. 1 ed. 1997 Read More