Into the Wild Chapters 10-14 - TheUtmostTrouble Forum

10-14

lgreenwood26 — Tue, 28 Oct 2025 02:18:29 +0000

When Krakauer starts talking about his own trip to Alaska in Chapter 14, I was kind of confused at first. The book had been all about Chris McCandless, so it felt weird for the author to suddenly make it about himself. At first I thought it was unnecessary, but after reading it, I actually think it helps. He’s not trying to steal the spotlight he’s showing that he understands what McCandless might have been feeling because he went through something similar.

Krakauer says, “At that age, death was far from my mind. If I worried about anything, it was that I might live a long life without ever knowing the thrill of living close to the edge.” That really stuck with me because it explains why McCandless made such risky choices. Later, when he admits, “I was unprepared for the climb, but such unpreparedness was part of the point,” it reminded me of how McCandless went into the wild kind of unprepared too, but did it on purpose. It’s not about being careless it’s about wanting to feel something real.

Even though this chapter slows down the story a bit, I think it adds a lot of meaning. It made me see McCandless in a more understanding way. If I were writing it and had a similar story that helped explain my main character, I’d probably include it too.

Into the Wild 10-14

jlabbe26 — Mon, 27 Oct 2025 23:48:04 +0000

It is not ethical for Krakauer to insert him into this book, especially since its a story about someone else's life and just casually insert himself to talk about his life. I see it as disrespectful towards Chris McCandless and his family who might've read this book. I think it would've been okay to talk a little about how he can relate but to have a whole chapter dedicated to himself isn't right. If he were to write a Chapter about himself, it should have been at the beginning of the book, not the middle. I can appreciate that Karkauer talks about a similar experience and kind of helps the audience understand what Chris McCandless might've felt. This could also be a reason Krakauer is so biased towards McCandless, because he understand how he could've felt. Maybe if this was a family member who talked about their personal story it would've made more sense, but Krakauer has never met McCandless before. I do believe having Karkauer insert himself into the book helps the reader understand Chris McCandless mindset and motivations. Krakauer helped me understood how he felt with barely any food left and how anxious he felt. He was, "nearly out of stove fuel and down to a single chunk of cheese, my last package of Ramen noodles, and half a box of cocoa puffs." (Krakauer Pg.140). This quote explains how Krakauer was starting to feel and he was worried about how much food he had left. This makes me think about how Chris McCancless might've felt trying to look for food and if he was trying to look for a way back to people like Krakauer did. Krakauer also explains all of the pain he had felt, "I began to hyperventilate, my calves started to shake. I shuffled a few feet farther to the right, hoping to find thicker ice, but managed only to bend an ice ax on the rock." (Krakauer Pg.143). This quote really shows how rough it really is to be out in the wilderness like that in those conditions. Similar to Chris and I can appreciate this other view point on How Chris McCandless could've possibly felt out by himself. Even though I do appreciate what Krakauer had to say, but I do think it might've slowed down the story just a bit. The story is meant to be about Chris McCandless life, not Krakauer. It was oddly placed to tell his story half way through the book. If I everr had a relevent story, such as Krakauer does to Chris McCandless, I don't think I'd ever share it. If I took my time to see these people to have interviews with and to still tell a story because I relate in some way, I'd feel awful. Into the Wild should be a book only about Chris McCandless and the people who were in his life.

Forum 10-14

kmoran26 — Mon, 27 Oct 2025 01:53:42 +0000

In Krakauer’s book, Into the Wild, his writing approach is biased most time, and he discreetly puts himself in the story, such as using ‘I’ in his writing. This is rare in most historical fiction, especially since Krakauer is a journalist and formats the book as such. However, for chapter 14 of his novel, he doesn’t talk about Chris McCandless or his journey, but instead talks about himself and his journey to Alaska, taking inserting himself in a story to a whole new level. I believe that it is not ethical for an author to insert himself in a story, especially this far into the novel. I believe this is because it drives attention away from the main point and characters of a story to instead show the author doing something that might not be fully related to the main character and its plot. Although having an author insert themselves into a story can be seen as unethical, there can be exceptions to this belief. An example of this is if an author is writing about a true crime case and is inserting themselves at the crime scene to find clues or put things together. This can be seen as ethical because by inserting themselves, they help the story progress and move forward.

Although Krakauer's interruption into the story slows down the main story of McCandless, his interruption can also be seen as helpful. Why this can be seen as helpful is that it shows why Krakauer decided to write an article and novel about Chris McCandless, because he relates to him. Krakauer discusses how the two were similar, like, “As a youth, I am told, I was willful, self-absorbed, intermittently reckless, moody. I disappointed my father in the usual ways.” (pg 134). This helps show that Krakauer empathizes with him and that he can see himself in McCandless, and why he would want to run away, making his bias understandable. Krakauer understands McCandless’s need to run away, because when Krakauer did it, he describes how he, “hen I climbed into my car and departed for Alaska. I was surprised, as always, by how easy the act of leaving was, and how good it felt. The world was suddenly rich with possibility.” (pg.136) Showing that he relates and can understand the urge to go see the world and how freeing it can be. This interruption offered us something that we wouldn’t have had in the novel, the reason Krakauer was invested in writing this story. He was invested in this story even when he was called crazy for defending McCandless; he didn’t back down because he knew the need to escape it all and understood MMcCandless'viewpoint. It helps the viewers view McCandless’s actions a little more fairly because while we might not know the real reason he left, by getting a story that's similar to both the narrator and adventure, it could change viewers' interpretations of who they thought McCandless was. I feel like if I were the author, this addition is necessary because it would explain why I’m devoted to this story and its significance to m,e because I see myself in McCandless.

I found this element surprising because the whole story thus far has been about McCandless and his journey to Alaska and his death. So having the viewpoint switched to the author was intriguing and interesting. I felt that this did slow down the momentum of the McCandless story because we are drifting away from the main point of this story by instead focusing our attention on something relevant, but not at the same time. I dont think I would insert myself into a story if I had a relevant one to share because the main story wouldn’t be about me, so why would I take people's attention away from the main point of my story that I'm discussing to something that isn’t connected to my story.

Into The Wild - 10-14

sdwyer26 — Tue, 21 Oct 2025 22:37:49 +0000

It is not ethical for Krakauer to insert himself in the story the way he did. If he wanted to talk about himself, he could’ve made another book to tell his story. But this book is supposed to show why Chris McCandless did what he did and to share his story. I think it's insensitive of him to have these interviews with people who knew and loved McCandless, and then write chapters that have nothing to do with his story.

I don’t believe that Krakauer’s interruption is helpful, but I can see why he did it. It offers us a first person perspective of the situations that McCandless was in and how his judgement could’ve been clouded based on what was happening in that particular moment. “I had paid a bush pilot in Petersburg $150–the last of my cash–to have six cardboard cartons of supplies dropped from an airplane…For the next four days it snowed, nixing any chance for a flight.” (Krakauer 140) I feel like a lot of people wonder why McCandless didn’t try to go home if he saw things were going downhill, but seeing a situation similar in this perspective helps readers understand the gravity of these situations. “The sour taste of panic rose in my throat. My eyesight blurred, I began to hyperventilate, my calves started to shake.” (Krakauer 143) I appreciate the vivid details the author used to describe this part of his experience. The raw fear and unease of going through something to this extent. This chapter helps readers understand how he was really living and describes how harsh the conditions truly were.

I was surprised to hear a first person story being told when I expected the next chapter to jump back to McCandless’s journey. I feel this slows the trajectory of the story and just goes on for too long. I agree that it was a good idea to help readers gain a new point of view, but I think he just went on for too long. If I was writing this book, I probably would add a personal story if it was relevant to the primary characters story, but I would keep it concise and keep only the pieces necessary.