Now that we've finished Into the Wild, share your final thoughts, questions, and responses to the text; include anything you might not have gotten to share in our discussions. Post as a comment. Want to watch the trailer for the movie? Click here and go to "video": http://www.intothewild.com/ (Also, please take the poll re: ACT!)
20 comments:
Overall, I really enjoyed this book. Though I didn't like Chris in the beginning of the book, I started to like him at the end. I thought through most of the book that Chris was unprepared, impulsive, and ignorant. But after recognizing that he did really well surviving in the wild and realizing how he actually died, I felt bad for him and thought that his death really wasn't his fault and it was unfortunate because he was doing so well. When I was reading at first, I felt like one of the people who sent angry letters to Krakauer about Chris's journey but as the book went on Krakauer convinced me that Chris was actually a really intelligent person and had some interesting views and I started to respect him. Though I still dislike how he handled relationships. He should've been more aware of other people's emotions.
Krakauer made me start to think about Chris's ideals and think more about how I live my life. I really liked Krakauer's style of writing and I would like to read his article and compare it to the book to see how his view on Chris changed after more research.
For me, Into the Wild, was a very interesting book to read. I usually end up enjoying the books I read in my English classes, and with this book, I feel the same. When I first read the title, I expected a story completely about Chris McCandless's story as he struggled and overcame while in the wild. Although the book had a lot about McCandless's adventure, it also talked a lot about people's encounters with him, people's opinions of him, and other stories of other people who somewhat relate to him. At first I didn't really like how Krakauer would go off McCandless's adventure story and go into all these other subjects, but as I read on and as we continued to discuss the rhetoric, I thought it was really interesting how Krakauer decided to write McCandless's story. I found myself often feeling the same emotions as Krakauer did so I think he did a very good job in appealing to the audience and subtly persuading them to think the same way as he does about McCandless.
This book has made a lasting impression on me, has caused me to think, and has caused me to look at myself and notice my own flaws. I thoroughly enjoyed this book because it made me think not only about McCandless, Krakauer, and myself, but at society as a whole and its flaws. Like Donald stated in class I admire the fact that McCandless was able to go out and live how he wanted to and defy society's rules. Although I don't completely buy into the whole nature thing (just because I’m not really a camping kind of person), or the complete self reliance idea, I respect Chris for sticking to his beliefs and trying to better himself. At the beginning of the book I only half respected Chris because he seemed hypocritical, selfish, and naïve. However, by the end of the book Chris has changed for the better. Early on, Chris struck me as selfish for completely deserting his family and using Ron, Wayne, and Jan. But, at the end of the book, Chris had a revelation that really hit home with me, “HAPPINESS ONLY REAL WHEN SHARED." Chris made mistakes, but was eventually able to learn from them. In this sense I agree with Krakauer when he compares Chris to a monk because Chris does isolate himself to learn more about himself and fix his flaws. Although I'm not going to defy society and explore the wilderness anytime soon, I would like to follow Chris's example of looking closely at myself and learning from my mistakes, learning from literature and others' examples, and sticking to my beliefs and convictions. In a sense I want to be like Chris and at least attempt to live my life the way I know I should. Although at certain parts of the book McCandless’s flaws are apparent, when looking at the whole big picture, one can see that by the end of the book he ultimately achieved his spiritual goal of becoming his own, better person.
I think Into the Wild is an interesting book. Throughout the novel I questioned Chris' motives for betraying his family and adventuring into the wild, and by the end I gained a better understanding of his reasons (though I still do not believe they are justification for leaving his family). Krakauer seems to portray Chris as an adolescent on a spiritual journey and he uses many rhetorical strategies to persuade the reader to share his respect for Chris. His addition of Chris' pre-Alaskan life and the stories of many other individuals similar to Chris (including Krakauer himself) allows the reader to perceive Chris' courage and connection with nature. My respect for Chris gradually increased as I read through the book, and I truly pitied him when I read about his death by starvation. Still, I don't think the final message is a depressing one; Chris lived a fulfilling life and went down smiling.
I really enjoyed Into The Wild, the writing style, the story line, the characters and it was all real! Of course there are pros and cons like any story, but the pros outweighed the cons.
CONS:
-Chris is annoying: Chris McCandless' character is the confident type, that occasionally comes across as cocky, and that really irritated me.
-Krakauer is so bias: Even though he stated that he was being journalistic and objective, Krakauer totally related to Chris and, on many occasions, backed him up on seemingly trivial facts. I have read 'Under the Banner of Heaven,' so I know that it is not Krakauers regular writing style to compare the character to himself and to take such an interest in the subjects of his book. I didn't like how he kind of saw in Chris' life what Krakauer wanted to see, not necessarily what was actually there.
PROS:
- The riveting plotline: At first when Mrs. Gerber said that we were going to be reading 'Into the Wild' Donald shouted from behind me that the main character dies, and I got really angry. But then he told me that they state his death on the cover, and I began to wonder why they would put the seemingly most interesting part of the story at the beginning. But the book was about his journey, which was powerful and touching.
- The side characters: The few people that Chris came in contact with on his journey show the Americans that we in suburban chicago don't often see. Hitchhikers, blue collar workers, flea market booth owners, Into the Wild showed the overlooked and the color that their lives are filled with.
- The danger and excitement: Not just Chris' journeys down rivers or encounters with bears, Krakauer's own journey up the Devil's Thumb was really exciting and interesting to read about.
Into the Wild was not what I expected at all, and I plan on sticking it on my book shelf. It will go in between Tale of Two Cities and Catcher in the Rye.
I liked this book. I ususally don't read books like Into the Wild, but I liked how unique it was. It was almost like a nonfiction novel, which is sort of an oximoron in itself, but nonetheless, I revelled in its unorthodoxy. I think it was out of the ordinary for the most part because Krakauer switches off between a journalistic and nonjounralistic voice yet still includes his opinions in both tones. I also enjoyed reading, not so much trying to remember, all of the switches in time. I thought that showed good control on Krakauer's part. Nonethless, I must say, Chris really annoyed me. At first I thought he would not be as preachy as Thoreau. I was wrong. I must also note, at least in my own mind, that most of the time Krakauer was shining Chris in good light, it was through his own words, not Chris'--the entire time, I felt I was being forced into liking Chris when I really didn't. At the end though, it was an interesting read.
Although I found myself skeptical of Chris's intentions and purpose in embarking on this journey, Krakauer successfully persuaded me to admire Chris's determination and individual thoughts. I also came to respect his growth in understanding that life cant truly be lived without people to share it with. Originally, I found his solitude annoying and unsettling. However, I really enjoyed looking through the psychological lense that Krakauer wrote from. It was also intriguing to read a book that revealed the conclusion at the beginning and instead explored the "why" and "how" of a story rather than the "what." One thing that I am looking forward to is seeing the movie. Krakauer's description of nature is essential to the story, but for me his description probably wouldn''t have done Alex's surroundings justice. I am a visual person so I wish that Krakauer would have included more pictures so the reader could really appreciate what his parents were able to. I hope that the movie will satisfy my craving for nature now. I also am looking forward to seeing Emile Hirsch because he is one might say that he is easy on the eyes. ;)
I absolutely loved Into the Wild. I can't really even describe how amazing it was, but I know that it is by far the best book i have ever read for school and one of the best books i have read. I think it's because i could identify with Chris McCandless (his thoughts/ way of thinking) as well as the book itself. The weirdest part, though, was that i really was planning an "Alaskan Expedition" since freshman year for this summer, and that was long before i had even heard about this book. Of course, i wasn't going to go alone or live off the land or anything like that, but i was planning on driving or flying to somewhere in Canada so that i could drive the rest of the way to Alaska (probably with my mom and my brother). Unlike a lot of people in class who said they stopped liking Chris after his letter to Franz, I loved him throughout the whole book. I saw the letter as very inspiring and a huge act of unusual compassion toward Franz. He cared about him enough to want Franz to have the best life that he could possibly live. Krakauer's writing was very descriptive and he made me feel like i already knew Chris. The reason i respected Chris so much, i think, was because of his intentions: he wasn't out there to PROVE anything. He just wants to FEEL nature and its power. He won't be "talked out of it." He just wants to BE (as Thoreau would say) to know what it's like to LIVE.
For a while,I did not enjoy Into the Wild. At first, I found Krakauer's repitition of facts extremely annoying, as well as the different interviews that pretty much said the same idea. I also did not like how Krakauer went into extreme detail and took up a lot of space on subjects that could have been explained briefly. But, I did enjoy how Krakauer made Chris and his journey more tangible in the middle and near the end of the book. Krakauer's descriptions of his own journey helped me realize how harsh Chris's was.
My opinoun of Chris started to swing once Krakauer mentioned he was a cross-country runner.(I thought "Jeez, this kid is just like me")I found it very interesting that he was. He kind of fit right in to the independence of the sport, and the outdoors and nature setting.
Over the summer my family was looking for a good movie to watch as a family. This means nothing gory and nothing mushy so we ended up deciding to watch Into the Wild as recommended by my sister. Before seeing the movie I had absolutely no prior knowledge about Chris McCandless. Therefore, as I was watching the movie, I was shocked when he died in the end. I believe it is good that the book reveals right away that Chris dies, because it is much more effective to focus on Chris’s journey, than to keep the reader questioning the outcome. Also, Chris’s sister narrates the movie and hearing her tell his story gave me a sense that she respected Chris and had forgiven him in a way. Therefore, unlike many of the other people, I came into this book with respect for Chris. Although I don’t think Chris had the best common sense, I really do admire him and the way he radically worked toward truth and acting as he feels is best. (I agree with what Donald said in this regard.) Therefore, I feel Krakuer did achieve his purpose, but coming from someone who already sided with Chris I sometimes felt that the author was pushing the reader to like Chris almost too much and that bothered me. All in all, I really enjoyed this book. Even though we couldn’t get into Chris’s mind I felt that we were by the end, because of all the descriptions of Chris from the people he met along his journey. The thing that will stick with me the most from reading this book is just this idea of self-judgment. Chris really made me stop and look at my life, and on the 9.5 hour plane ride back to the US, I even found myself planning out the details of what my “McCandless” journey would be. Also, what struck me was that this happened so recently. With people like Thoreau and Emerson I had trouble relating or believing what they said, but with Chris, he came from a suburban neighborhood and just seemed so typical.
I like that this book keeps me thinking.
Into the Wild is definitly one of my favorite books that I've read for school. Into the Wild is any easy read, but not easy like uncomplicated and not advanced. Its an easy read because the book is interesting, and while you're reading you're not just trying ot get through the reading, you're reading because you want to know more. I didn't completely agree with Chris, and through out all the book, I didn't really like Chris because of the way he treated his family and the people he met, especially Ron. However, during the final chapters I found that I really did like Chris, and I sympathized with him. Im sure this was due to Krakauer's writing though. Also, through out the whole book, Chris kept constantly reminding me of Holden Cauffield in Catcher in the Rye. He leaves home, he has a horrible relationship with his parents because they dont understand him, he loves his sister even though he left home, and he loves nature. So that pretty much sums up my last words on Into the Wild. Our next book has a tough act to follow....
Into the Wild might be my Catcher in the Rye for junior year. It may be too early to say this since Into the Wild is one of the first books we read but I really enjoyed reading the story of Chris McCandless. I thought the book kind of lacked in the beginning and it didn't really rev my enthusiasm for the book. I thought he was just another crazy, nature lovin', tree hugger man who wanted to live separated from society and he was just that but the book provided more insight. Chris McCandless' purpose became more personal which really intrigued me. I never knew of McCandless, more so of people like him who chose to live a risky life in the woods contrary to a comfortable lifestyle. I actually liked Chris as a person; I thought his intentions were respectable. Sure some may argue that he is arrogant and selfish, especially when we consider the people he meets, but I believe that this journey to Alaska meant so much more to Chris that he used everything in his power to experience this and be satisfied with his life which he eventually did. I don't think he wanted to do all for the fame or the right to boast(even though a book and movie was produced) but I think he just wanted to challenge himself and be proud with just living life on the edge and in the end he gets what he wants. Again, his journey was personal and that's what I liked. Towards the middle and end of the book I couldn't stop reading. Krakauer kept throwing information after information and I found myself wanting to know more about Chris and his life, more than the book provided. I would have loved to meet Chris McCandless if he was still with us today. I think he would be able to open my eyes into a new world, and advise me to take risks and just live my life the way he did. I loved reading this book. Into the Wild is one of those unique types of stories that engages readers and makes you feel like you actually know the character after you read his or her story. And, I agree with Lauren. I'm excited to watch the movie and Emile Hirsch is quite a looker. :)
All in all, I liked this book because it made me think. Krakauer's ability to blend together facts, storytelling, and arguments got me to see through the eyes of Chris and understand his motivations. I especially liked how Krakauer focused on Chris's mindset and the progression of his journey rather than his survival skills or bare facts.
Chris himself, I'm not so sure. Krakauer showed Chris to be an admirable and generally good person who was just a little immature. Krakauer got me to agree with him that Chris's ideals were admirable and that he behaved well with all the hitchhiking people and that he was competent in the wild, but as Krakauer intends, I saw contradictions too, especially in his treatment of his parents (which I cannot dismiss as secondary and unimportant no matter how great his ideals).
I shaped my opinion on Chris's ideals by also looking at his character. Chris as a person is not a trivial concept to me.
In the best light, I saw Chris as a great person who had unusually strong ideals and a strong will to follow them.
In the worst light, I saw Chris as an arrogant, self-righteous faker who never thought he could be wrong and pursued a flawed and immature realization of poorly formed abstract ideals.
The fact that I couldn't rule either of these out completely made me think that while obviously the ideals of transcendentalist individuality and moral purity are great, it's really really hard to truly, not superficially, achieve them in life. As Krakauer intends, I admire Chris for trying very hard and getting very close.
I really liked this book. When I heard we were going to read it in class, I was really excited. I’ve read it a couple times before, but reading it in class gave me some new insight to the story. I know a lot of people didn’t like the book, they didn’t like Chris, they thought he was annoying, selfish, and just plain stupid. But this is my opinion, and I really like the book, even Chris as a character and especially the journey he took. “Into the Wild” is one of the few books assigned in a class that I’ve actually liked. The first time I read the book, I felt that I had to share it with someone; I felt that the message was so important. Now that a large number of students have read this book, I think maybe some people’s ideals may change. Or maybe people will only listen to those who say how stupid the book is.
I think Chris’s journey, even though he died, is very admirable. Very few people have the will to give up most of their possessions and stray from the comforts of normal life. I don’t care if others have negative opinions of Chris. I really liked him as a character. I thought that as a main character in books we’ve read in school, he was a very interesting new type. Overall, I think that “Into the Wild” is a great book.
This is one of the few books I've read that was interesting and appealing to the younger generation. Watching those survival shows on TV, I myself have wondered what it would be like to live in the wilderness unsupported by society if it would be even possible for someone like me. I never intended on doing it, but it would always be a small thought in the back of my head, "What would it be like?" What I enjoyed the most about this book was the irony in the end. Despite claiming to have no path to salvation, there were many ways which Chris could get help or get out without directly crossing the river. I thought the way Krakauer used what evidence he had to tell the story and what he admitted he could not say due to a lack of evidence made him a credible author for this book.
Being both a nonfiction AND class assigned book it’s uncharacteristic how much I enjoyed reading Into the Wild. The writing styles of Krakauer further enhanced the intriguing tale of Chris McCandless. I enjoyed reading about his journey, and the extra facts and investigations of his life were at no time boring. The epigraphs included at the beginning of every chapter were extremely thought provoking and a very good decision by Krakauer to include them. He was slightly bias in his portrayal of Chris, but I actually didn’t mind because I felt the same respect for Chris as Krakauer did. He was a dynamic character who lived the kind of life that he wanted to. Though I would never be as drastic as Chris, it was inspirational to read about his journey for personal happiness and the lessons he learned.
Although I am not a big fan of books dealing with nature, I enjoyed reading Into The Wild. I thought the story of Chris McCandless was both interesting and refreshing, as the book gave me a different insight to life. Despite my own belief that I should live my life the way I really want to live, I often fail to accomplish this; instead, I do what everyone else does and go with the 'flow'. Although I thought that walking into the wild to live sans a word to his own family and close friends was crude, selfish, and foolish of McCandless, I admired his confidence in his abilities and his belief that he would survive in the woods by himself, in addition to his courage in carrying out his dream despite what other people may have thought of him. Chris's death was unfortunate but he was described as being happy and serene before he died, and this is because he was able to do what he truly wanted to do and had no regrets in his life.
Post a Comment