Friday, February 5, 2010
Blog 3
When I first wrote my essay, I thought that Christopher McCandless was foolish and that it was his fault that he died. After reading further into Jon Krakauer's book, I still believe that to be true. He was a hopeless romantic, and it ended up being his kiss of death. The people Chris met on his journey believed that he was a smart good kid, so some readers believe that this shows that McCandless was a good guy. However, if you look at the people whose lives were changed by Chris; a couple who traveled and sold items at flea markets, an 80 year old lonely man, and Westerberg who ended up going to prison; I can't help but question these remarks that Chris was a smart, good guy. After further reading of Into The Wild my opinion that Chris McCandless is foolish has strengthened.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You make some good points and I do have to agree with you that he really didn't know what he was getting himself in to. I do think he needed to go on a different path to keep himself sane, maybe he wanted different things from life than most people would consider. But, he was, in the end, at fault for his own demise because he was foolish in his expectations.
ReplyDeleteYou make good points for someone who thinks he was foolish, because he didnt have the knowledge to go into the wild as he attempted to do and going into the wild unprepared is foolish.
ReplyDeleteYou question that he is a good guy because he changes people's lives. What I think you are saying is that because the people he affected were not young, aspiring people really contributing back to society, that they do not matter or that their opinions do not. Arguing people's worth aside, I think it is still important to remember that the author gets to include or leave out whatever they want. Maybe he did change "normal" people's lives at some point but Krakauer did not find this to be important to his book or help his purpose.
ReplyDelete