In the novel Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer goes on to explain that as he has done extensive research and investigated more of Chris’s Life he shares a similar lifestyle to Chris, because of these similarities his opinion of Chris is understandable which justifies and gives reason to his actions. When Jon writes he feels a deeper understanding of what Chris feels in certain situations. He’s agreed with his behavior that many people disagree with and find it naive. Jon Krakauer sees a lot of himself inside Chris, which makes his opinion of Chris be notably compassionate.
Say no to plagiarism.
Get a tailor-made essay on
'Jon Krakauer’s Opinion of Chris Mccandless'
To begin with, Chris is someone who is important to Jon. Even though Jon has never met Chris, he cares for him deeply. He traveled around the country to find people who knew Chris which helped him write his story. “Although he was rash, untutored…….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, he wasn't an outcast. McCandless was something else- although precisely what is hard to say. A pilgrim, perhaps”. Kracker has concluded that McCandless is a sane individual who knew exactly what he was doing the only difference between his fate and Chris’s was that he survived merely by luck. Krakauer had a similar experience and can relate to McCandless’s sense of adventure. He doesn’t think that Chris was deranged or uneducated. Jon Krakauer relates to Chris McCandless and is, therefore, able to defend his story due to the close relation of their ethics and character. Jon Krakauer had a great understanding of Chris’s life, almost an obsession with him. They have many things in common. When it came to domestic life their parents, specifically their fathers had a huge impact which affected their journeys as adults. “But I believe we were similarly affected by the skewed relationships we had with our fathers. And I suspect we had similar intensity, a similar heedlessness, a similar agitation of the soul'. People who commented on his death knew nothing about him or his background and couldn’t understand. Jon, on the other hand, knew what Chris had felt in those exact moments and felt a sense of compassion for him. Krakauer found many similarities between them which were that they were both passionate people who misunderstood their feelings. They both believed that they understood the world when they still had lots to learn from it. He understood the risks Chris took because he had also taken some deadly risks.
In conclusion, Jon Krakauer’s opinion on Chris is that he felt a deeper connection with him and was able to understand why Chris had taken all those risks. He knew that Chris wasn’t incompetent or ill-advised. He saw a lot of himself in Chris. He knew that what Chris was trying to do is to figure himself out and find the true meaning of life.
