TheUtmostTrouble TheUtmostTrouble
Afterward + Additio...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Afterward + Additional Materials

3 Posts
3 Users
0 Reactions
130 Views
Protobeing
Joined: 5 months ago
Posts: 16
Topic starter  

Initially reading Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer, the reader is led to think that Christopher McCandless is some random guy that wanted to go into the Alaskan woods to escape reality. When looking into the actual reason for McCandless’s seeming unprepared adventure, you start to realise the in-depth reason why he embarked on this journey.

My first thoughts on why McCandless wanted to escape was because of his parents. I have mentioned this in my previous post Ch 15-Ep saying, “With McCandless’s life when he was younger seemingly a fraud, with his father living a double life, McCandless’s reaction his entire life was probably to get away, get away, and get away due to the awful environment he no longer trusted. McCandless took this to the extreme and went into the Alaskan wilderness while getting away and might have taken it a bit too far.” But after reading the Forward by Krauker, it only further confirmed my theory. When Krakauer was interviewing McCandless’s sister, he states “Chris’s seemingly unexplainable behavior during the final years of his life was in fact explained by the volatile dynamics of the McCandless family while he was growing up.” (Krakauer xv) After saying this, it further dives into the fact that there were struggles of abuse that Carine (Chris’s sister) did not want shared at the time of the release of Into the Wild, but Krakauer very subtly hinted to in the novel. Even an article by Dylan Skurka saying that Chris being selfish by distancing himself from his family is simply a “myth”. His family was never fully supportive in the first place by being abusive.

Another idea that these external resources helped me get a different perspective on was Krakauer’s involvement in the novel. When Krakauer put his personal stories in the novel around chapter 15, it really did improve the reader’s ability to understand McCandless’s reason for exploring the Alaskan bush. When Dylan Skurka wrote Into the Wild: What Chris McCandless’s Story Reveals About Ourselves, he says “Almost as if Jon’s spirit was reincarnated into Chris’s body, whenever I read this passage I get the impression that the connection between the two men is rooted in how they shared the same underlying motivation to go off on their respective journeys: that in conquering their obstacles in the world, they believe that they could silence the excruciating turbulence within themselves.” and later stating that when we look at their journeys through this lens, it doesn't make McCandless, or even Krakauer's story seem so outlandish. Maybe instead of thinking of McCandless as completely unprepared and selfish, we can understand the true reasoning, and how everyone is always trying to conquer their own obstacles in their own journey, just in a different way. 

These external materials help improve understanding of not just why McCandless wanted to explore the Alaskan wilderness, but also why Krakauer produced the novel in the way he did, as well as the forward. The materials also further confirmed many of my thoughts about McCandless, such as how awful his family life was, but with his family life being worse than pictured in the novel. These other resources are important to read to get full context to the life of Christopher McCandless.


   
Quote
Protobeing
Joined: 6 months ago
Posts: 15
 

What stood out most in your post was how you showed your shift in understanding McCandless as just a guy running from reality to recognizing how deeply his family’s volatility shaped his choices, especially with Krakauer’s line about the “volatile dynamics of the McCandless family” backing that up and your point about the “selfishness myth” reframing the narrative. Your reflection made me rethink my own assumptions, too; I hadn’t fully considered how isolating his home life must have been or how leaving might have felt like his only option, and it reminded me how quickly we judge people without knowing the emotional history behind their decisions. I also found your insights on Krakauer’s personal stories really compelling, since his connections with Chris open up a broader conversation about how we view people who break away from expected paths. Your post left me wondering whether Krakauer should have included more of the family’s truth when the book was first published or whether holding back was the more responsible choice, and I’d be interested to hear where you think the discussion about McCandless’s legacy should go next.


   
ReplyQuote
Protobeing
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 31
 

I like how you interpreted what Dylan Skurka wrote to invite broadening our perspective on McCandless. I think it was especially meaningful when you said, "we can understand the true reasoning, and how everyone is always trying to conquer their own obstacles in their own journey, just in a different way". It makes me think about how diverse opinions can lead to change. In the case of McCandless's story, his cause of death was heavily debated and criticized, and Krakauer accepted the opinions of journalists and scientists to find the true cause. I agree that other resources give context to McCandless life, but they also help dig further into the lessons that we can learn from his life and Krakauer's writing.

Do you think we should always view other perspectives before forming opinions?  Should they be reflected on after viewing other sources?

 


   
ReplyQuote
Share: