Into The Wild Rhetorical Analysis

The non-fiction book, Into the Wild, by author Jon Krakauer, is the story of Christopher McCandless, a young Emory Graduate from a rather wealthy family, who is mysteriously found dead in the Alaskan wilderness in September 1992 at the age of 24. Krakauer retells significant events of McCandless leading up to his death. In Into the Wild, Krakauer uses many rhetorical devices in order to support his argument. Krakauer effectively manipulated the rhetorical devices of characterization, comparison, logos, and anecdotes to convince the audience that Chris was not particularly unusual and as insane that people perceived him to be.

Jon Krakauer had the same experience as McCandless with his family and travel to Alaska, but Krakauer knew more about survival and had company in case of any danger. Krakauer compares, “as a young man, I was unlike Mccandless in many important regard… And I suspect we had a similar intensity, a similar heedlessness, a similar agitation of the soul” (55). Acknowledging McCandless’s background, Chris left society because, in Krakauer’s point of view, of the “agitation of the soul” and the “similar heedless” of society. McCandless didn’t agree with society’s standards that being successful meant having a well paid occupation, especially when McCandless’s parents enforced it onto him. McCandless truly did not want to uphold the wishes of his parents, for Chris to go to college and get high paying career, but it wasn’t what Chris really wanted, so he left all of his conflicts with his parents and his values or “agitation of the soul” to create a new identity as Alex Supertramp and live in the wild. In today’s modern world, humanity lives in an environment where people are controlled and dependent on others. Chris’s father is someone he despises because of his characteristic of being controlling. Walter becomes controlling over Chris, who pressured him into college. As a result, Chris has an “agitation of the soul” to become independent, and a “heedlessness” for society and had an “intensity” for

In the author's notes he put “Through most of the book, I have tried--and largely succeeded, I think to--to minimize my authorial presence. But let the reader be warned: I interrupt McCandless’s 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”(Krakauer 2). By telling us that he will add some stories of his own make us realize that Krakauer has some relation with McCandless and it make us think that this book is more believable. In the book when he tells us that Chris just died for a simple mistake and tries to relate it to himself by telling the story of how he started to realized that going into the wilderness will change his life he emphasizes“I would go to Alaska, ski inland from the sea across thirty miles of glacial ice, and ascend this mighty nordwand. I decide, moreover, to do it alone. ” Just like McCandless, Krakauer had a lot in common with him, they both went into the wild of Alaska, which gives a lot of experience to krakauer to talk about McCandless death. In order for Krakauer to make McCandless not a crazy kid he made some other similarities between McCandless and some other people that died, with a lot of characteristics similar to McCandless and himself. Krakauer is the ideal person to criticate

Chris McCandless was a man who had everything to have a successful life. However, Chris McCandless decided to leave it all behind. Chris thought that he was going to go leave all society behind to go live in the wild. Chris thought that it was going to be very hard. Krakauer He was arrogant and ignorance toward the nature and society. In Into the Wild Chris leaves his life behind to live a life alone in the wild. In Into the Wild Krakauer’s message from Chris’s journey is for people to never get too ignorant or too confident because anything can go wrong at anytime.

The similarities between the journey’s of two men are undeniable, Krakauer includes his own journey to supply the reader’s with his reason and drive to do it supplying the reader’s with further background. Giving reader further background on what might have driven Chris to embark on his quest will not force reader’s into Krakauer’s opinion but serves to give them more insight on the event so that they more justifiably form their own.

The author of Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer shows the mystery of the novel and tries to unravel it throughout the story. He believes that Chris may have been aware of a long line of characters from American literature who rejected society and its values. Chris took

Jon Krakauer is an author whose work primarily focuses on the wilderness and his experiences. His novel, Into the Wild, divulges into the life of Chris McCandless and his adventures into the wild Alaskan frontier. Chris seeks isolationism from his family and society and goes as far as to change his name to Alex Supertramp so he is not discovered or recognized by anyone. With mere long term survival experience, Chris makes several minor mistakes and dies; unbeknownst to anyone. After discovery, Krakauer devoted several years to Chris’ life story, going as far to use his journalism background to interview any family, friends and coworkers Chris encountered to synthesize a final overview of his life. Krakauer’s relationship with his own father

Krakauer defended McCandless from criticism about him being incompetent, narasstic and stupid. Krakauer described “.....he [Chris] displayed a staggering paucity of common sense. But unlike Waterman, McCandless wasn’t mentally ill” (85), but Chris was something different”.... precisely what is hard to say. A pilgrim, perhaps.” (85). In other words, krakauer did not see chris as a person that went unready for his journey and that he went there because he was a teenager that did not care about anything. Krakauer supported what he said by adding “.... he wasn’t incompetent- he wouldn’t have lasted 113 days if he were. And he wasn’t a nutcase, he wasn’t a sociopath,....”(85), Krakauer explained here that if he was stupid, he would not had survived for over three months in the wild. Later, Krakauer presented many testimonies that described Chris as a nice, intelligent and dependable guy. One of these testimonies is When Westerberg said “...... He [chris] was the hardest worker I’ve ever seen. Didn’t matter what it was, he’ll do it……… He was what you’d call extremely ethical. He set pretty high standard for himself”(18). From using this tone and the testimonies Krakauer makes the reader give excuses and have a sense of how is Chris personality and why did he think of going to

Jon Krakauer's novel, Into the Wild, relates a true story of a young man named Christopher McCandless and his remarkable but fatal journey to discover contentment in the Alaskan wilderness. Krakauer wrote a magazine article about McCandless in 1993 and became obsessed with discovering more about the young boy and his death. With his novel, he shares the story of McCandless and hopes to ignite the same interest in his readers as he developed when he first heard of the boy’s enthralling story. He hopes to enlighten his readers’ views on how happiness can be achieved and spread McCandless’s insatiable desire for adventure to young people today who are seeking the meaning of life and the joy that comes along with it. Krakauer’s eloquent writing and candid tone make Into the Wild an authentic, effective tribute to the life of Christopher McCandless.

Final Writing Assignment for Into the Wild Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer is the story of Chris McCandless a young man who meet his untimely end in the deep wilderness of Alaska at the age of twenty-four in 1992. This story has been met with lots of controversy other whether McCandless should be looked at as a moron who got himself killed because of his arrogance or a dreamer who marched to the beat of his own drum and lived his life, however short, to his beliefs. Both statements are true as Chris was an idiot in some ways and was an inspiration in other ways. One way Chris McCandless was an lunatic hero was shown by McCandless’s journey down into Mexico with the goal of “allowing his life to be shaped by circumstance (29)” which he fully achieved, even if not reaching the ocean, this shows the admirable characteristics shown by McCandless as well as his visionary yet stupid views such as his believed of “moral responsibility to flout the laws(28)” given to him by Henry Thoreau in his writings such as On the Duty of Civil Disobedience(28). Under this belief McCandless burned his

Krakauer wants the reader to understand that Chris McCandless has similarities and differences with other people who have comparable stories involving Alaska. In chapter eight, Krakauer states common traits between him and four past Alaskan trekkers: “Like Rosellini and Waterman, McCandless was a seeker and had an impractical fascination with the harsh side of nature. Like Waterman and McCunn, he displayed a staggering paucity of common sense”. However, the author also states how McCandless is unique: “But unlike Waterman, McCandless wasn’t mentally ill.

Jon Krakauer wrote “Into the Wild” to share Chris McCandless’ story. In the book, Krakauer presents Chris’ journey and every detail that Chris wrote in his journal, as well as every person he encountered with throughout the journey. Krakauer traced back every step Chris took to show the world how Chris’ journey went. Although many would believe that Chris’ went on this journey as an adventure, I strongly believe that Chris McCandless was truly trying to run away from the problems he was facing at home.

In 1996 Jon Krakauer wrote a book called Into the Wild about a young man who embarked on a great journey across the United States and the Alaskan wilderness. In this book Krakauer gives an account of Chris McCandless’s short life and he searches for clues that could lead to the cause of McCandless’s of death. As the story develops and McCandless goes further into his journey, his ideas about many things, such as money, change.

Into the Wild, a book by Jon Krakauer, tells the story of Christopher McCandless. McCandless was a young man who felt the need to live an unorthodox life by living off the land. McCandless developed ideas about philosophy from Jack London. His education is greatly respected, although his perception of the meaning of life and his ideas about how to find true happiness are misunderstood without problem. McCandless felt that the only way for him to be happy was to venture into the Alaskan wilderness with nothing more than a bag of rice and a measly backpack. A man named Shaun Callarman stated that he did not think Chris’s venture was honorable at all. It was Chris’s poor preparation and big mistakes that costed Chris his life and Callarman thinks

Although Christopher McCandless was an idealistic vagabond with some redeeming qualities, Krakauer’s analysis and judgement of McCandless was muddled by his need to portray Chris as a sort of tragic hero, rather than a man who was simply struggling to discover himself in a world that did not understand him. Although Christopher McCandless was an idealistic vagabond with some redeeming qualities, Krakauer’s analysis and judgement of McCandless was muddled by his need to portray Chris as a sort of tragic hero, rather than a man who was simply struggling to discover himself in a world that did not understand