Into the Wild
Christopher was a fool
Christopher was a boy who was born in a rich East Coast family. He graduated from one of the best universities in the United States. However, he wasn’t content with his life and didn’t know what the truth about his existence was. Therefore, he decided to abandon his family and society to find his sincere self, which was his vital target. He thought that he wasn’t the person that he was supposed to be. Clearly, he was ready to sacrifice himself to find his original self and his true being. He went on a long journey that ended in Alaska. After living alone for 112 days, he died due to starvation. Life is a gift which is given by God.
In life, we all have some responsibilities to implement, such as worshiping, serving our parents, and serving and protecting our countries, which are holy tasks. We all encounter hardships and crises. Nevertheless, Christopher ignored all of these responsibilities and pursued his selfish thought. Therefore, I believe that he was surely foolish.Have you ever seen a hero who has run from a place where he has encountered problems? The answer is no because a hero is a person who is ready to face any difficulties in order to solve them.
However, Christopher abandoned the place where he had problems, so his deeds such as leaving his family, money, and friends pointed out that he was a fool. Young children should be ready to sacrifice their lives in order to protect and develop their countries because if they don’t do it, who will? Nevertheless, Chris deserted his society instead of serving and protecting it. Once, he said, “How important it is in not life necessarily to be strong but feel strong.” His decision was the opposite of his quote because if he was strong or felt strong, he should have faced his problems in the society instead of his foolish decision, which was quitting the society.
In addition, he also gave a bad message to all teenagers. His actions showed that leaving the society is a way to solve problems though it is the opposite of reality. For example, you have an internal problem in your home and want to solve it. Do you think that leaving your home may help you solve it? No, it isn’t possible; thus he was a fool. This isn’t the mere reason that persuaded me he was foolish; ignoring his loyal family and a great degree is another factor. Even though he had a respectful and loving family and graduated from one of the best universities in the USA, he was being foolish and left them. His family gave him what he wanted and required. Therefore, he was supposed to take care of his parents, but he didn’t even think about it, and he also forfeited his family to fulfill his selfish aim.
When parents become old, they can’t live independently because they may face many difficulties which they don’t have the ability to solve. Who is responsible to help elderly parents unless their children? Mr. Jamel, who is my relative, is very happy because he has a son. He usually says that his son is the mainstay of his life. He knows when he gets old, his son will be the first person to support him. As a result, Christopher should have remained at home to take care of his parents when they aren’t able to run their lives. Moreover, almost everyone tends to get a good degree in order to get a good job.
According to Chris’s story, I realized that a professional degree can’t help you get a job if you are a fool because Chris had a good degree, but he didn’t have any job due to his foolishness. He also said,” The core of man’s spirit comes from experience.” However, he didn’t take any responsibilities in the society to enhance his experience. He should have gotten a great job and improved his skills. He also should have found what the truth is through working and experiencing. However, He was a fool due to not caring about these points. There are some people who say he was a hero because he tried to be independent and to find the truth. He also burnt his money because money is nothing for heroes.
However, their ideas are totally irrational. For their first reason, he could have been independent in his country. For example, he could have married the beautiful girl whom he met during his journey and lived independently. He also might have found the truth while living and working in his country. Although he went to find his true self, he killed himself. Wasn’t he a fool while going to find something but losing everything? Also, burning money makes no one a hero but a fool. If a man has a mind, how can he burn money unless it is a sign of being foolish? Why didn’t he save it or give it to charity? Well, good question. I know why because he was utterly foolish.
In conclusion, human beings are creatures who should be different from other creatures such as animals. For instance, we have some responsibilities and attributes which animals don’t have. For example, we must worship our God and invoke Him to give us paradise. We should live in societies where other populations live, be honest and helpful, save our countries, and take care of elderly people and support them. We are supposed to encounter severe hardships because we are strong and can defeat every difficult circumstance. We should also respect our parents and obey them, get a good degree and get tasks, and respect life and save it. We shouldn’t put ourselves in danger because we desire to have safe lives. Finally, we should get married and produce new generations who will repeat what we have done. These are some difference between us and animals. Let me ask you a vital question, did Christopher do what human beings are supposed to do? No, he didn’t, and his actions were totally the opposite of people’s deeds. He acted merely like an animal; therefore, he was a fool.
“Into The Wild” by Jon Krakauer
Jon Krakauer wrote a biography, Into The Wild (1996), describing a man’s, Chris McCandless, life before and during his journey to Alaska to be able to discover himself and a new life while leaving his family with worry and pain. Jon Krakauer has demonstrated Chris’s relationship with his family, like his father who he did not get along with and his sister who he adored so much, and how he left his family without warning or ever contacting them during his journey. Chris McCandless has always been around money and a caring family that he wanted to see the reality of the real world where money is not in it or the importance of his family. He supports his claim by describing McCandless’s journey while meeting new people and experiencing new things like living independently and not being around so much money like his family. Krakauer has discussed his own experiences, in the book, traveling to Alaska like McCandless, comparing their experiences based off McCandless’s journal and Chris’s acquaintances that he has met on his journey.
The author made sure to include many thoughts and opinions on Chris McCandless’s courageous journey without the right equipment and money to help him get through. In the end of the book Krakauer described the death of Chris McCandless in Alaska in the magic bus, died from starvation because he was unprepared. Krakauer’s purpose is to show how reckless, selfish, and courageous someone can be in order to discover themselves and finding the meaning of life while also impacting others” lives. Jon Krakauer adopts an empathetic tone for people who want to discover themselves and travel to do so. If Chris McCandless were to look back at his inspirational journey and see the grief and pain he caused his family, he would have still went on this journey because it was the only way for him to find his independence and find himself. Chris McCandless had met many people, went unprepared on purpose, traveled on his own, and depended on himself. Although Chris McCandless went on a difficult journey while leaving pain and grief to his family, he did live an inspiring life because he followed his dream journey to discover himself without letting anything stop him.Some people would not leave their family unannounced and cause so much grief and worry, but Chris McCandless did. Chris McCandless’s family had expected so much from him like him going to Emory college and graduate from the school his father went to. McCandless has been living in Atlanta for a while and was able to call and send letters to his family to keep them updated about his life, but then he stopped contacting them which led to them going to Atlanta to see what was going on and they found his apartment empty without him. In the book it stated, “Five weeks earlier held loaded all his belongings into his little car and headed west without an itinerary…an epic journey that would change everything.” (Krakauer, 22)
Jon Krakauer has shown what McCandless has done before his parents showed up. He meant that McCandless has followed his dream that will change him. Chris McCandless has made sure to not warn his family at all about his leave. This may have been tough one for McCandless since he did everything to satisfy them and kept them updated. McCandless has also kept a close bond with his little sister, Carine McCandless, which he also caused grief to in the end. Carine was more understanding to why her brother left which she said in the book, “…But I didn’t really feel hurt by his failure to write. I knew he was happy and doing what he wanted to do; I understood that it was important for him to see how independent he could be…”(125) Both family members felt different to the situation on why Chris left without warning. McCandless was able to go on his journey with the worryness he left his family not letting it disturb him.Throughout his journey to Alaska McCandless had met many people who offered their help to him. Chris McCandless had started going by the name Alex Supertramp or Alex McCandless when he began his journey and met his first acquaintance. Beginning of the book Jim Gallien was coming from Fairbanks and picked up a hitchhiker, Chris McCandless, taking him to the stampede trail. During the car ride Gallien got to know more about what Chris was carrying which made Gallien concerned since the young man was unprepared. In the book he has stated, “There was just no talking the guy out of it,” Gallien remembers. “He was determined… He couldn’t wait to head out there and get started.””(6)
Jim Gallien meant that he tried to scare the boy but Chris would not back down. Gallien noticed how determined Chris was to explore the wild without the right equipments, cold weather, and not enough food to last him. The speaker, Gallien, and I both noticed how determined McCandless was for his wild journey. Letting nothing stop him even if it means he may not survive. Chris McCandless has been working at Mcdonalds and many coworkers would offer him help or a ride home since he came to work many time smelling awful. In the book Krakauer has wrote, “ McCandless had tried to disguise the fact he was a drifter living out of a backpack: He told his fellow employees that he lived across the river in Laughlin.” (41) McCandless has been camping and squatting in vacant homes. He was hiding that he was homeless, so possibly no would feel bad or offer help. McCandless was having a difficult moment where he had to work for his money and not let people know he was homeless, because he would not accept any help. In the end Chris McCandless was able to make it to his final destination in his journey, Alaska. After Jim Gallien had dropped him off at the Stampede Trail, Chris found himself the in the “magic bus”. The magic bus was a bus stranded in the Stampede Trail where it got stuck during the snowing season so people left it for others to stay in and keep warm. While he was able to make it, he got poisoned by some seeds he mistaken. In Chris McCandless’s journal he wrote, “DAY 100! MADE IT!” he noted jubilantly on August 5, proud of achieving such a significant milestone. “But in weakest condition of life. Death looms as serious threat…trapped in wild…’” (195)
Chris knew he was not going to make it but everyday for him was an achievement surviving. This was a difficult time for McCandless since he was getting weak and getting close to death. Chris McCandless knew about the possibilities of dying and he still took the chance to go unprepared and able to achieve his dream.Everyone had something or someone that inspired them to do something with their lives or choices, like for Chris McCandless it was Henry David Thoreau and Leo Tolstoy. In Family Happiness by Leo Tolstoy it stated, “I wanted movement and not a calm course of existence. I wanted excitement and danger and the chance to sacrifice myself for my love. I felt in myself a superabundance of energy which found no outlet in our quiet life.” (15) This passage was highlighted in McCandless’s book found with him. This quote related to his family since they were not a close family since the parents expected a lot from Chris and always pushed for the perfect son. In the book Chris mentions that his father was with his first wife during the time Billie, Chris’s mother, had Chris McCandless, which led to Chris McCandless being angry at that fact. Chris did not have a close bond with his father for that reason also. Another passage was highlighted in Walden, Or Life In The Woods by Henry David Thoreau and it stated, “Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth. I sat at a table where were rich food and wine in abundance an obsequious attendance, but sincerity and truth were not; and I went away hungry from the inhospitable board. The hospitality was as cold as the ices.” (117)
Chris McCandless believed he did not need so much money or the love from his family to explore and he wanted to make Thoreau and Tolstoy proud. McCandless burned his money where he decided to leave his datsun, his car, and some other items. Krakauer has stated, “…he arranged all his paper currency in a pile on the sand–a pathetic little stack of ones and fives and twenties–and put a match to it…” (29)
McCandless wanted to tramp around and hitchhike. He wanted to live a life that does not involve around money. This was quite inspiring since Chris was always around money and the wealth of his family, but he was able to leave that behind and not let it run his life. Although Chris McCandless did leave grief and pain to his family as he left unannounced, he did live an inspiring life because he was able to become self aware and independent. This journey of his has let him be more self aware of himself and life, he wanted to experience another life experience besides jobs and school. He was able to just pack a few things and leave while his family stayed behind. Chris McCandless lived without money and the right materials to stay in the wild on purpose. If Chris McCandless could look back then he would not regret anything that happened, which was that he was able to learn and achieve his journey.
The Life of Chris Mccandless in into the Wild by Jon Krakauer
Into The Wild Review
Jon Krakauer’s bestseller Into the Wild is at first glance a biography and background story to an event that made national headlines; but on a closer look it actually turns out to be an attempt at documenting the human condition and trying to simplify life into a straight forward story, instead of the complex mess it really is, along with showing readers how much of a lasting effect Chris McCandless left on people and the importance of personal connections. Krakauer manages to describe his subject, Chris McCandless’ life through using interviews with people who had known him in life to tell the reader how Chris lived and the impressions he left on people, instead of Krauker simply describing Chris himself.
This is a recurring motif throughout the entire story, where Chris left a sizable impact on just about anyone he met on his journey, so much so that even someone Chris described as a “lunatic” still remembered Chris clearly years later and was able to describe McCandless’ behavior (Page 41). Along the same idea, Krakauer is able to profoundly describe Chris without using any words of his own, instead using the words of an old woman to paint a picture for the reader of who Chris was and she said “I only spent a few hours in [Chris’] company, it amazes me how much I’m bothered by his death” (Page 67). Coming from an aged woman, this statement carries particular weight because it makes Chris seem to be a once in a lifetime person, who could make an impression on just about anyone he ever had the chance of speaking with.
However, although Krakauer seems to hit his stride in the book when using interviews to describe McCandless, this author still makes a dignified attempt at simplifying the complicated thing called life, even if he did trip up occasionally. Kraukauer tries to make Chris’ story into a narrative by leaving out what he deemed boring and only filling the reader in on what he thought was necessary for the “central plot” of Chris’ life to advance. For example, Krakauer completely skips an enormous chunk of Chris’ trip into Alaska, and the reader only becomes aware of this time skip after someone being interviewed about Chris says that they drove him for a thousand miles, although Krakauer only spends a few paragraphs on this particular person and their interactions with Chris (Page 160).
Another part in the story where I felt that Krakauer slipped and simply was not able to make his narrative of Chris work smoothly, was Chris’ adventure down south into Mexico. On a 5-month canoe excursion into Mexico, Krauker seems to be unable to give any reasoning as to why this journey important for Chris and why the reader even needs to know this event ever happened, like he did for most other events in Chris’ life that Krakauer describes. Kraukuer seems to almost forget this event even happened later in the story, never referencing it again. Although this seems like it would’ve been a very eventful journey in Chris’ life, Jon only spends about three pages in total on this trip and what it meant for Chris, which I felt was strange seeing as for almost every other aspect of Chris’ life, Krauker writes as if he were telling a story and did not want the audience to miss any important details, but he for some reason chose to virtually never again mention Chris’ trip down south, and the significance it had for Chris.
However, even through some of his missteps, Jon Krakauer is still able to paint a beautiful picture and make sense of the life of someone who tried to make their own life unfollowable. He was able to redeem the legacy of Chris McCandless and show him off to the world as a extraordinary individual.
Jon Krakauer’s View of the Role of the Badlands as Depicted in His Book, into the Wild
Properties of the Wilderness
The wilderness is composed of a variety of landscapes that are both captivating and treacherous in nature. Such environments inspired Chris McCandless to substitute his life of conformity for spontaneity, and to trek across the country unto his death. Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer retraces McCandless’ obscure journey across North America. Before presenting the findings of McCandless’ travels, Krakauer introduces each chapter with one or two epigraphs, often excerpts highlighted by McCandless himself. A particular epigraph originates from Roderick Nash’s Wilderness and the American Mind, arguing the purpose of the wilderness:
Wilderness appealed to those bored or disgusted with man and his works. It not only offered an escape from society but also was an ideal stage for the Romantic individual to exercise the cult that he frequently made for his own soul. The solitude and total freedom of the wilderness created a perfect setting for either melancholy or exultation. (quoted in Krakauer, 157)
This epigraph captures the utilization of the wilderness as an escape from humanity and a platform to openly express thought. However, Nash fails to mention the instinctive need for socialization and the inability of nature to solve all problems.
Wilderness can be characterized by land in its rawest form, free of industrialization and human intervention. Because nature strikingly contrasts cities, it is often a location where people flee in order to not only escape society, but also escape their problems in it. McCandless fled for the wilderness to evade “the impending threat of human intimacy, of friendship, and all the messy emotional baggage that comes with it” (Krakauer, 55). Nature’s isolation from society allows for one to sever their contact with the rest of the world and achieve ultimate solitude. Upon entering the wilderness, McCandless was finally “emancipated from the stifling world of material excess, a world in which he felt grievously cut off from the raw throb of existence” (22).
Wilderness is the perfect environment in which to actively practice philosophical thoughts, especially those instilled by the Romanticism movement. Romantic thought is heavily influenced by inspiration drawn from nature. McCandless, “born into the wrong century” (174), was a modern romantic of his time and openly displayed his enamoration in the freedom of the wilderness. Nature provides the inspiration needed to fuel creative drive while maintaining insusceptibility to government control or criticism. Universal freedom granted by the wilderness allows uninhibited expression of a large spectrum of beliefs and emotions. In the wilderness McCandless adopts and develops his own philosophy of “Deliberate Living” and the “Great Holiness of Food” (168) successfully without anyone to debunk his beliefs.
Although the wilderness is an environment for ultimate freedom, it must not be demeaned into a platform to balance problems. The epigraph captures the positive aspects of the wilderness but leaves negative traits associated with the wilderness unacknowledged. Nash portrays solitude as a benefit in nature, but deprivation of social contact can cause intense loneliness or psychological weakness. Humans have adapted to be social creatures, and therefore tend to enjoy the company of others, especially in unnerving circumstances. Krakauer explains, “I’m happy as hell that I’m not here alone” (176), when traversing through the disquieting landscape of Alaska. Even McCandless kept in contact with close friends Jan Burres and Wayne Westerberg throughout his journey. And although many seek to escape their problems in the wilderness, sometimes the problems will still remain when they return. Such is the case of Krakauer after climbing the Devil’s Thumb “it changed almost nothing. But I came to appreciate that mountains make poor receptacles for dreams” (155).
Overall, Nash rightfully portrays the wilderness as a perfect setting for those who seek to escape humanity, judgment, and ignorance, as well as and a canvas on which one can paint their soul and emotions without hesitation. However, the impending threat of loneliness and the inability of the wilderness to assist in solving problems should be recognized in order to avoid misconceptions of reality. The wilderness reaches to the far ends of the Earth, bordering the corners of ever-expanding industrialization. Although it may not hold all of the answers to the world’s problems, it extends open arms to all the world’s hopes and dreams. Taking up the priceless offering of freedom, McCandless, like many others, did away with society and threw themselves into the wild.
Biographical Discourse of Krakauer’s into the Wild
Within the contents of a variety of different biographies, there are multiple similarities between the conventions that are typically used. However, there are also multiple differences between them in their features that set these works apart from one another as well. The author’s effectiveness while using these conventions correlate with the reader’s enjoyment of the book in this challengingly interesting genre too, all of which is handled exceedingly well in the biography Into the Wild, written by Jon Krakauer. While told through a somewhat disjointed yet captivating timeline, Krakauer recounts the life of Chris McCandless during his liberating journey throughout North America, spanning from Chris’ childhood to the day he is found dead in the Alaskan wilderness. Throughout the pages of his book, Krakauer conforms to typical conventions of a biography by using original sources and deviates from these conventions by including a unique structure in his chapters as well as an explanation of his own life experiences to further enhance the reader’s own experience of reading Chris’ story.
First and foremost, the book conforms to typical biographical conventions by retracing Chris’ steps with original sources. For example, after interviewing Jim Gallien for information about Chris, Krakauer is able to recapitulate Gallien initially meeting “the hitchhiker [Chris McCandless] standing…thumb raised high, shivering in the gray Alaska dawn” before he drove him further into the Alaskan wilderness, never to be seen alive again (Krakauer 3). For the purpose of building more credibility as the biographer, Krakauer is practically required to interview Chris’ family and the people he met on his journey to be more holistic and well-rounded in his research and writing. Furthermore, Krakauer consults the writings of Chris McCandless himself, incorporating his letters and journal entries throughout the entirety of the book. For instance, Krakauer includes the letter to Wayne Westerberg in which Chris writes about finally arriving in the Yukon Territory, proclaiming “I now walk into the wild” (3). Being the titular quote, Krakauer places it in the beginning of the first chapter, emulating Chris’ audacious tone and establishing an ominous, foreboding mood for the readers throughout the rest of the chapter and also the rest of the book. Obviously, Krakauer’s typical usage of primary sources and materials in order to gather information for this biography enriches the reader’s enjoyment as well as his own credibility as a writer.
Contrary to the similarities to other biographies, Krakauer’s book deviates from typical conventions by also creating a unique structure within its pages. Most noticeably, relatively simple maps appear before various chapters begin, such as the one that is placed before chapter nine, which depicts the surrounding area of Davis Gulch around the border between Arizona and Utah (86). By including this map, readers can effortlessly visualize the content of the chapter as they are given a basic understanding of Chris’ path due to Krakauer’s unique structural convention that is not seen in most other biographies. In addition to the map on the page before, epigraphs from Chris’ letters and other writers’ works also serve as equally unique syntax in order to begin each chapter, complementing any image Krakauer aligns with it on the page before. One particular epigraph that emphasizes this is from Everett Ruess, in which he writes “as to when I shall visit civilization, it will not be soon…I have not tired of the wilderness; rather I enjoy its beauty and the vagrant life I lead” in a letter to his brother (87). This refreshing variance from the usual paragraphs seen outlining Chris’ story as well as in other books augments the reader’s piqued intrigue of the book, as it also serves to juxtapose the philosophies and endeavors of both Chris and Everett Ruess, both of which emphasized various transcendentalist beliefs approximately sixty years apart from one another. Krakauer’s intent for including this comparison is to therefore not only highlight the subject matter and message of the chapter, but to also allow readers to draw their own conclusions about Chris’ uniqueness as well as with the similarities between the different adventurers. As a result, this book’s slight dissimilarity in the genre and structure itself, being almost like a written documentary about Chris, heightens the perpetual interest and captivation of audiences sustained throughout the text.
Likewise, another deviation from usual biographical conventions is Krakauer’s apparent authorial bias as he even dedicates a couple of chapters in the book to purely discuss his own experiences. Blatantly confessing “I won’t claim to be an impartial biographer” in the Author’s Note, Krakauer continues to explain how he related to Chris’ story personally, and therefore it made “a dispassionate rendering of the tragedy impossible”. By being upfront about his own bias and admiration towards the young explorer, he establishes a foundation of honesty and trust with his readers as they are made aware of his personal connection to the tale they are about to delve into. Later in the book, two chapters are chiefly devoted to Krakauer relating himself to Chris, especially when he describes how in 1977 he aspired “to climb a mountain called The Devil’s Thumb” just as Chris also had a certain inclination to travel through wilderness in solitude (134). Accordingly, this unusual convention gives readers Krakauer’s authorial perception of Chris’ story, specifically projecting and almost analogizing his personal connection with Chris to their different experiences and expeditions in their respective wildernesses. Consequently, this second distinction further supplements the reader’s own perception of Chris, the book, and now even Krakauer himself; despite its unorthodox nature, it still bolsters the value of the biography explaining the author’s own perspective on Chris McCandless as well.
There are numerous conventions that are used in various biographies and other books with similar genres, each with conceptually overlapping techniques as well as their own exclusively unique features. This being said, Jon Krakauer’s method of using biographical conventions in Into the Wild is no exception as it details Chris’ journey throughout all of North America. Essentially, Jon Krakauer exponentially enhances his intriguing biography of Chris by using conventions such as utilizing primary sources to gather information, formulating a unique structure within each chapter, and including his own personal experiences as he relates to Chris McCandless himself.
A Positive and Negative Perspective of Homelessness in The Walking Dead and Jon Krakauer’s Into the Wild
The Power of (no) Home
Home is a place that offers much more than just physical shelter, it offers emotional stability and security. Home is place that people can come back to without feeling as if they’re unwanted; they’re treated as if they are important, it gifts them with a sense of purpose and meaning. College is a crucially important time in many young people’s lives where they have to say goodbye to their home and then create a home of their own. It’s not easy to be independent, but it will build a persons character and their self-worth if they show themselves that they can achieve the goals that life has set out for them. Being away from home/homelessness is a growing and mature experience and is a positive thing. On the flip side, a zombie apocalypse might be the one exception. The Walking Dead is a tv show that portrays the power of both homelessness and home, while showing the characters having to fight for their lives.
A home does not necessarily have to be a household. A home could just be a community of people. Season 4 episode 1 of The Walking Dead is a testament to this. They make their living space a prison, but the community of people is what truly made it a home. Just like a regular house, the prison offered an extensive amount of security and protection for the community. Without the prison’s tall chain fences they would be devoured by zombies within a blink of an eye. Even as crisis strikes the people, they still manage to maintain a level of normality. For example, in the midst of a terrible tragedy, Michonne makes a joke to Rick about how his beard is getting way too big and then she proceeds to give him a razor as a gift. In a situation like this, maintaining a level of normality is a key factor for staying sane. This is also true in everyday life, with or without zombies. When someone is going through a rough time, sometimes they need to reevaluate the situation and live in the moment.
In that same episode of The Walking Dead, a mentally unstable nomadic woman, who had no home in the physical sense and emotional sense, attempted to trick and murder Rick while he was trying to help bring her and her husband back to the prison for safety. Easily enough, Rick managed to disarm her of her blade, and then she proceeded to commit suicide. This woman’s psychological thought process and behaviors show a lot about how not having a home or failing to attempt to build a community with others will only lead to detriment. Home is a mindset. If nowhere is home, then a feeling of insecurity will haunt a man like a ghost. This woman’s skewed and bizarre tendencies not only stem from her traumatic experiences during the crisis, but also stems from her lack of security. She had no real home, and she never attempted to build one by creating a community. A community of people definitely would have gotten her the type of security she was looking for. gotten She preferred to trick innocent, helpful people for her own twisted personal gain.
Shockingly enough, there is also a positive perspective on homelessness, as opposed to in The Walking Dead. A passage from Jon Krakhauer’s novel “Into the Wild” depicts an incredibly interesting and rather thought provoking perspective on homelessness. In the passage, a young man named Alex attempts to show an eighty-one-year-old man, Ron, the joys of being one with nature, and nomadic. Alex emphasizes the importance of brand new experiences when he says, “The very basic core of a man’s living spirit is his passion for adventure. The joy of life comes from our encounters with new experiences, and hence there is no greater joy than to have an endlessly changing horizon, for each day to have a new and different sun.” Not only is Alex suggesting for a couple of new experiences to be had, he insists that “there is no greater joy than to have an endlessly changing horizon”. That is a very big leap from a life of normality. According to Alex, living the same life with the same situations each and every day is not only monotonous, but it hinders “the opportunity to revolutionize your life and move into an entirely new realm of experience”. In contrast with The Walking Dead, Alex says that, “you are wrong if you think Joy emanates only or principally from human relationships…My point is that you do not need me or anyone else around to bring this new kind of light in your life. It is simply there for you to grasp it, and all you have to do is reach for it.” In a way, this quote majorly oversimplifies what it takes to reach a state of enlightenment. Alex’s tone in the passage is very preachy. His oversimplification makes it difficult to truly understand how to reach that level of life experience by going nomadic. To leave your home and all your things behind, it sounds preposterous. The most shocking thing about it is that the eighty-one-year-old man “took the brash twenty-four-year-old vagabond’s advice to heart”. Ron, the old man, then immediately packed his bags and just left. This is a testament to the fact that for some people, a monotonous, heavily busy lifestyle in modern day society just isn’t cut out for them. This elderly man who has lived the same way his whole life just decided to be gone with the wind. According to Alex, his own lifestyle is the way to go; mystery around every corner. Experiencing new things not only builds character, but it also invites further new experiences to occur, therefore a never ending cycle of new experiences come their way. When the door to civilization and society is closed, the door to nature, adventure, and inner peace is opened.
On a smaller scale, the new world that Alex is discovering can be compared to a high school graduate leaving home and attending a university many miles away. The new college student is often enlightened by their new experiences. Not to say they are without struggle or emotional turmoil, because they certainly are. Being away from home can be a terrifying experience because the security that you once felt is no longer there. It is the student’s responsibility to create a home somewhere in their new area, and find a community that accepts them and makes them feel secure again. At the end of the day, after all the hardships, the college student is better off because they have built a strong foundation of character as well as an independent personality, no longer having to answer to Mom and Dad all the time.
With regards to home, there’s a certain unspoken truth that the owner of the home has power within it. The people that visit the home are completely governed by the homeowner. What they says goes under their household. In a Ted Talk called “How to Understand Power”, Eric Liu puts the mystical essences and nuances of power into understandable words. Power is accumulated in six different ways. These methods for power accumulation are as follows: Physical force, wealth, state action, social norms, ideas, and last but not least, numbers. For example, in the previously mentioned The Walking Dead episode, the community in the prison has power over the zombies through the method of physical force. The zombies, pushed up against the sturdy chain link fence, are no match to the blades stabbed into their brains. Also, the community gains power through the method of having numbers. Instead of going it alone, they decided to team up, and that gives them a significant amount of power. When you have more manpower, supplies, healthcare, weaponry, and food are made more readily available. The community also gains powers from ideas, namely the idea that one day the world will be clean of zombies again and that they will survive. The idea gives the prison community power because it motivates them to fight for it. An idea can go a long way, especially if the people who support that idea has already gained power from sheer numbers.
Power coming from an idea can also be linked back to the passage from Into The Wild. The idea of freedom and living off the land entrusts Alex with a certain amount of power. Such power, in fact, that he convinced old man Ron to do the same exact thing. That’s exactly what Ted Liu means when he refers to the power of an idea. An example of the power of an idea lies in political movements such as the Civil Rights movement, or for a more modern example, gay marriage, or the legalization of marijuana. These ideas started with one voice, and that started a powerful domino effect. Eventually, there are so many people fighting for a certain cause or set of principles that the governing body will hear what the people have to say and, ideally, will create laws accordingly.
According to Ted Liu, there are three laws of power. First, power is never static; it’s always taking action. Second, power is like water; it’s always flowing. Politics can help organize the flow of “water” and distribute power. Lastly, power compounds. Power begets power, and so on and so forth. In reference to The Walking Dead, these laws of power can really be seen in action. In a zombie apocalypse, the people tragically involved expect the unexpected. Things may not always go as they seem. Any second, a tragedy could be waiting to happen around every zombie infested corner of the earth. You win some battles, and you lose some battles; that’s where the first law of power comes in. The flow of power is ever changing, there is nothing that could ever slow it down. As time passes, power shifts. Among the community, power is distributed through specific jobs or duties around the prison. This is where law two applies. They use a form of small scale politics in order to distribute power in an effective and meaningful way.
There is a lot of power that comes with a place call home. On the other hand, there’s a lot of power to the idea of making your home nowhere. This is where The Walking Dead episode and the Into The Wild passage differ. One emphasizes the importance of a home while the other emphasizes the importance of no home. Home is not just a physical construct. It’s a place where a person feels comfortable, safe, secure, and loved. Leaving home is definitely not easy, but it builds character and a sense of independence. Being away from home helps a person identify who they are, what they want to be, and what they want to do in life. Homelessness can also be a positive thing when you look through the same eyes as Alex in Into The Wild. Both being homeless and being away from home can be positive experiences.
Metaphor over Experience: Transcendentalist Were Wrong
The transparent eyeball is a philosophical metaphor introduced by Transcendentalist, Ralph Waldo Emerson. The transparent eyeball represents an eye that serves only to be observant rather than reflective. Therefore it teaches us to take in all that nature has to offer. Christopher McCandles proves this very notion wrong. In the beginning stages of his life, he was very observant. He would keep to himself about the ideologies he strongly believed in. At times, when witnessing his parents fight, Christopher along with his sister would sit there witnessing their parents argue, with feelings of hatred. Chris absorbed the negativity from his parents and the corruptness of society. Chris McCandles acted as a transparent eyeball, according to Emerson, one would benefit from by being a silent onlooker since they would have a chance to find oneself. However, Chris did not benefit from being an onlooker, but rather it was the ability he had to voice his thoughts. This freedom was what powered Chris to find himself in the wildness. Without first standing up to his parents, he would never acquire enough will power to find himself in the Alaskan wilderness. Emerson and Chris McCandles, both incorporate transcendentalism in their lives, although, both seem to act hypercritical when carrying out their ideologies. Emerson preaches about living and going to the wilderness and finding himself, but he never did so, unlike Chris McCandles. However Chris gives us, readers an overwhelming amount of proof that he is a transcendentalist, but he performs a major task that contradicts his initial philosophies. Chris was seeking to go to Alaska to create his own experiences that diverge from society, although, found himself in a run down and used bus. This bus has clearly been used, and deteriorates his notion of creating one’s own experiences.
Christopher McCandles major turning point was when he broke out of the shell of the transparent eyeball is immediately after he graduated; his parents wanted to gift him with a new car. Almost instinctively, Christopher denied this gift, at that very point he was no longer an observant onlooker. He spoke out, and he voiced what he thought to be the way of life. As it is stated, “It was the first present she had received from her son in more than two years, since he had announced to his parents that, on principle, he would no longer give or accept gifts…’I can’t believe they’d try and buy me a car’…bought my respect” (p. 20-21) By Him affirming, he no longer wanted to accept of giving gifts, in other words, he didn’t want to owe anything to anyone. He was clearly an opinionated individual, once society capped him, he exploded, and unfortunately, his family felt the immediate repercussions, as he disappeared to Alaska for a long period of time.
The fact that Chris wasn’t raised and practiced expressing his philosophies, triggered him to ratify his life, also known as escaping to Alaska. Christopher had to eventually voice his revolutionary ideas, such as depending on himself, and not to feel in debt and owe anything to anyone, even his parents. This represents the first turning point of Chris McCandless of no longer being voiceless or absorbent, he is no longer a transparent eyeball. It was time for him to speak out and stand up for what he believed in, no matter the negative onlookers that he will face throughout his journey. The fact that Chris kept all his notions and thoughts bottled up until his graduation caused him to commit rash decisions such as burning his money or escaped into the wilderness of Alaska where he did not communicate with his family. His family was a major cause of his rash decisions and society’s corrupt filter on your true self. Because his emotions were bottled up for so long he acted out in what seemed illogical to us. If he would’ve voiced out his opinions from the start he would never feel compelled to abandoned his family and society.
Chris McCandless and the major transcendentalism, Emerson and Thoreau, both were hypocritical when carrying out their philosophical ways. Emerson is generally hypercritical since he preaches one needs to go out to the woods and find your true self, although he has never physically escaped to the wilderness, unlike Chris McCandless. One of Thoreau’s main idea was to make your own path and not to follow others footsteps, although Chris McCandless does not direct his journey in this way. As stated in his essay, Walden, or Life in the Woods, “It is remarkable how easily and insensibly we fall into a particular route, and make a beaten track for ourselves. I had not lived… he would meet with a success but it will be a success unexpected in common hour. “ (p. 933) Once he discovers the run down bus where lies in a used bed and puts old utensils into use. If Chris would have purely believed in his transcendentalist ideas he would not live where other experiences were created in that very space.
Emerson believes that when you are a child, you attain special connections to daily activities because you have not yet been corrupted by society’s filter. He states this in his essay, Nautre, “To speak truly, few adult persons can see nature. Most persons do not see the sun. At least they have a very superficial seeing. The sun illuminated only the eye of the man, but shines into the eye and the heart of a child…” (p. 487) Chris as a child was not able to have these personal connections because he was observant and acting as a transparent eyeball. Instead of acting as an extrovert and voicing his opinions, he was raised and trained his mind to stay silent. This caused his extreme urges of breaking out the reflective shell in order to have these connections that were in a lack of in his childhood. His expedition to Alaska made up for all of his lost connections as a kid. By being observant of society’s brainwashing powers, he became unable of speaking out, until a milestone in his life, graduation. This is when he was able to become independent and voice his philosophies, which allowed him to have the experiences he yearned for.
Emerson and Thoreau were major transcendentalists who were not only hypocritical but also teach, young journey seekers, such as Chris McCandless about personal experiences and daily life adventures. However, many of their philosophies are contradicted by their own actions. In addition, Chris McCandless proved some of their notions wrong. All of his childhood he had been what Emerson refers to the transparent eyeball, reflective and observant. This caused him to bottle his emotions and result in an extreme need to escape society. Emerson believes that being observant will lead to one finding oneself. But, in Chris’s case, he found himself in the complete opposite case. He spoke out and stated his philosophies, which shocked and disappointed his family, but for once he stood up for himself. Although some of Chris actions were contradictory to his initial conquest, for example, cheating his own experiences, and feeding off others “traveled paths.” He doesn’t take to the grave his philosophies in life, and but rather prays to god after claiming he was an atheist. Chris’s revered idols proved to be two faced in the end. Even though Chis proved some of Emerson’s notions to be incorrect, they still are similar, in the sense that they are both hypocritical.
Into The Wild by LaMarche Essay
It has been noted that “everything that happens to us-graduations, marriage, childbirth, divorce, getting or losing job affects us” (Adulthood 1). It is not right for one to live lonely, but sometimes circumstances may cause one to love this kind of a life. The strange action must have some driving forces behind it that may lead a young person to choose a lone life.
How can one choose to live alone or decide to live with animals in the wild? This essay will discuss the book, In the Wild with emphasis on a young man, McCandless and how he went to Alaskan Odyssey as a result of crises during transition from childhood to adulthood; so as to separate himself from his family.
McCandless’s life is bothered by his parent’s materialistic nature choices and this made him to move out of the home and becomes an itinerant. He lived in the wild where he hunted wildlife such as porcupines and birds for food. He roasted them but sometimes the meat spoiled because of poor methods of meat preservation. In this wild life, he sometimes failed to capture the animals for his meal and was provided by strangers. Unfortunately, he finally died in a bus because of starvation despite the efforts he made to get some assistance.
The Quest for Lonely Life
Christopher McCandless was a man who never liked people to be close to himself. He valued independence. He went to the extreme of being self reliant. He thought that people could not always depend on others but should have time to be alone so that they could discover their own will and thoughts. Christopher McCandless left his home to live on his own; something that not many people could appreciate. It has been felt that the quest for self awareness is something that the modern society is doing away with:
Some of the values that many people in modern society seem to have forgotten are; the quest for personal knowledge, the pursuit of individual happiness while not taking it from others, and above all, the ability to be comfortable in solitude and independence. (LaMarche 1)
McCandless believed in himself and did not want to imitate those around him or conform to their ways of life. He had a strong urge to do things his own way and the wild was the site to pursue his goals and vision. In addition to changing his environment, McCandless changed his name to Alexander Superstramp. This was significant as it symbolized a new person, leaving his former ways of living and stepping into a new way of life characterized by new work and even new meals.
His actions were criticized by many people because he never wanted any associations that would bind him close to other people. LaMarche did this to experiment and at the same time seek his independence. As a young man he did not enjoy the company of his family and kept to himself as he sought what he had considered as important to him: “…it was important for him to see how independent he could be” (LaMarche1)
To the greatest extent, it was his family especially his parents that made him to seek a new way of life which he embraced and considered worthwhile. The parent’s failure to teach and advise him on values of life made a major contribution to his adopting of a new way of life. His fathers’ relationship with his mother was the greatest question factor that pushed him to adapt to his new way of life.
He was disappointed with his father’s action due to his way of thinking that people are supposed to be perfect and that their actions were always supposed to be right. McCandless’ greatest problem was the inability to forgive and communicate accordingly with his parents. He did not have color grey in his world: “Christopher McCandless saw the world in black and white, good and bad, right and wrong, rather like a child does” (LaMarche 1).
McCandless believed that solitary life was rewarding to him. This was a similar case with Sarton who argued that, “Alone one is never lonely: the spirit adventures, walking / in a quiet garden, in a cool house, abiding single there” (Sarton 1). To this young man, what mattered most were his happiness and not other people’s opinions (LaMarche 1)
A person’s life at any given time involves both external and internal aspects. The external system is composed of our membership in the culture: our job, “social class and family and social roles” (Predictable 1); the argument is how a person is able to live to the fullest when he is able to balance all these aspects in his life. Many people often ignore their inner being which is the most crucial. McCandless was not able to share his inner feelings:
Chris was strongly opposed to any kind of unnecessary material procession. He wrote a letter to his sister before he took off to Alaska, complaining about his parents. I can’t believe they’d try and buy me a car. (LaMarche 1)
The young man reasons that there was no need to have luxuries and that one should concentrate only on what they needed. He had a negative attitude towards the wealth of his parents: “Chris is embarrassed by his family’s modest wealth, believing that wealth was shameful, corrupting, and inherently evil” (LaMarche 1).
The young man thought that wealth was an unreasonable way of valuing people and that it did not reveal the real person. McCandless wanted a simple life in the wild where he was ready to face many challenges. His main aim was to be himself. In a person’s development there are various changes that occur:
One is the interior sense of relation to others. A second is the proportion of safeness to danger we feel in our lives. A third is our perception of time-do we have plenty of it, or are we beginning to feel that time is running out? Last, there will be some shift at the gut leveling our sense of aliveness or stagnation. These are the hazy sensations that compose the background tone of living and shape the decisions on which to take action (Adulthood 1).
This is true because it was after McCandless thought deeply about his life that he took off from his home to the wilderness. He compared the wealth of his parent with those of other people in his area and did not appreciate it. He was not able to express himself and reveal his thoughts even to those close to him.
He went to the extent of writing to his sister a letter; it was his sister that he was free to his thoughts with. The wealth of the parents displeased him and in addition he had issues with his father having another wife before meeting his mother.
In school Chris shared with few students but he gradually reduced interactions to be completely independent in class work and athletics. To him he needed freedom from people and luxurious wealth.
Krakauer connects Chris with Gene Rosellini, a well-educated man from an affluent family who was interested to know if it was possible to be independent of modern technology. (LarMache2010).
It is clear that MaCcandless did not feel safe at his home. Since he believed in perfection he felt that his parents had betrayed his values and was not ready to forgive them. He believed that the wealth of his parents was not justly acquired and there was no way he could be ready to accept it: “McCandless distrusted the value of things that came easily” (LaMarche 2010).
He therefore wanted to acquire everything justly. Unfortunately it reached a time when this man could not handle it any longer. He was ready to take even a risky route so as to escape from the sight of his parents. Aware that the decision he was about to make would put his life in danger; he did not stop it but went ahead to the wilderness.
His parents attempted to buy him a new vehicle but he looked down upon it, since he felt that it was unnecessary for him to have a second car whereas he had another functional datsun car. This is ironical that the people that he should have loved most are the ones he put at a bay and did all he could to separate himself from his family.
This coincides with the argument by Sarton: “Loneliness is most acutely felt with other people, for with others, even with a lover sometimes, we suffer from our differences of taste, temperament, and mood” (Sarton 1).
It is also clear that McCandless realized that he could not change anything and time was running out. He felt a stagnation that was brought by being at home. A new environment was therefore a better place for change that would give him satisfaction in his life. The feeling of stagnation was erased from his mind once he set off for the wilderness.
No man is an island and no one can be able to live alone and successful. The company of people mostly spices a person’s life. The young man finally perishes in the wilderness as there is no one to rescue him. His remains were found about a week later after his death weighing about 30 kilograms.
The young man only punished himself: “the fierce idealism and searing self-reliance are seen as unattainable qualities that are mysterious and wonderful, but frightening and dangerous all the same” (LaMarche 1). Though McCandless achieved his self reliability, it was unsustainable.
The inner person should never be ignored and personal world should be in order. The beliefs in McCandless’s heart were the driving forces to his actions. McCandless’s life was ruined by his parents since they did not play part to concentrate on his personality development as he grew up. They gauged his happiness by how much materials they bought for him, good education and spirituality, ignoring his inner motivation.
Adulthood. Predictable Crises of adulthood. Gail Sheehy, n.d. Web.
LaMarche. Into The Wild. Christophermccandless, 2010. Web.
Sarton, May. The Rewards of Living a Solitary Life. Gregory, n.d. Web.
Into the Wild by Krakauer Essay (Book Review)
In the story, into the wild by Krakauer, like any other narration, the author uses different viewpoints he consider to be of great benefit to bring out certain messages to the reader of the story. The approach used by Krakauer is unique according to him.
Krakauer’s style requires that the reader makes a personal discretion in coming up with a conclusion of what might consequently happen to the character in the narrative. Unlike other writers who adopt an open narration system in where it is evident in the narrative what befalls the characters therein and how they react in the end, Krakauer’s style is secretive. Krakauer’s style in this story is that of confidentiality and suspense and the reader requires a sixth sense to understand the themes as they read the story.
Narratives should be written in a manner that gives the reader sufficient information or clues to enable him embed the narrative in an actual or realistic contest.
In the narrative, for example, the author starts the story with a character that is on a journey to the wild. The exact home the character hails from is not clearly defined and the reason why he is going away is also not clarified. The author however uses another character Gallien to enable the reader to understand the exact state of the character Alex as he is picked along the way by Gallien.
It can be understood that the author used this approach in narration to attract the attention of the reader and raise curiosity within him/her. The story makes the reader to be fixed on his chair as he seeks to understand how the character Alex found himself in the position he is in and how he will end up in his journey to the wilderness. In fact the author has successfully captured the curiosity of the reader with this approach since one anticipates getting an explanation as to why Alex was leaving for the journey into the wilderness.
As one jumps from one paragraph to the next he/she is convinced that he/she might get the explanation of what transpired before the current context that is captured in the narrative.
Despite the fact that the author has used suspense as one of the techniques at his disposal to narrate the life of Alex in the story it still would have been helpful if he had included some specific information about the reasons why Alex left his home or what exactly he was targeting to achieve.
The whole story is full of secrecy for it is evident that one of the characters in the narrative, Gallien, is in a similar position as the reader for he cannot possibly understand why Alex is going to the wilderness. Gallien, as a character who understands the environment in which Alex is going into, keeps on wondering if Alex is sane enough to understand the risk he is getting into. In fact he is placed in a more complex position when Alex himself seems composed enough to face the risks and dangers he does not understand.
It is evident that the author in this article used a unique approach that does not help the reader in understanding the context of the narrative properly. The themes in the article are also not very clear and the reader has to read severally to get an in depth understanding of the article. In fact the reader is more confused as he keeps on wondering what the motivation was for Alex to leave his home.
Krakauer, John. Into The Wild, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. Print.
The Mount Everest disaster of 1996 as it happened Opinion Essay
Thesis of the Book
The thesis of this book is a personal account of Mount Everest disaster in which the author had taken part, but it had turned out to be tragic in which he had lost some of his climbing partners as the disaster unfolded. Although the book has many themes that unfold as the story continues, the theme of mutual trust and care remains dominant across this entire tragic book.
Thesis of the Essay
The essay aims at summarizing the book in which the writer makes a personal opinion of the accounts as they are narrated in the book and criticizes the book to bring out the faults that can be identified in the author’s story of how the Mount Everest disaster occurred.
Summary of the book
Into Thin Air: A Personal Account of the Mount Everest Disaster is a book which was published in the year 1997. The book sets off to narrate one of the deadliest disasters that had taken place in Mount Everest from an individual point of view in which the reader is given a description of what actually happened from a survivor of the ordeal.
Krakauer who is the author of this book tells vividly of the accounts that occurred at the world’s highest mountain with such emotional clarity. This depicts why the book became a best selling nonfiction book on its release. The author of this book narrates how he participated in Mount Everest expedition, despite having surrendered his career in mountain climbing way years back.
The event took place in the month of May in the year 2006. The author, a professional journalist wrote and featured articles for the outside magazine. He had previous participated in many other mountain climbing expeditions from which he had gathered materials for his articles in the magazine. He later on gave up his career prior to this particular event that involved climbing Mount Everest (Krakauer 20).
Krakauer justified his change of heart to participate in Mount Everest expedition as being purely professional. In the initial plan as it had been reported in the magazine, Krakauer was to climb up to the Mount Everest base in which he was to make a report on the commercialization of the mountain.
However, in his childhood and wildest dreams, it evident that Krakauer had always aspired of climbing Mount Everest and this was the best opportunity which was right on the table. He requested his editor to hold off the story until later in the year so that he could get ample time to train hard for the monstrous task of climbing to the summit of the highest mountain in the world.
It is from this point that the book exhaustively and chronologically narrates the events that happened on the mountain as they ascended to the top of the world’s highest mountain. The author tells of the tragedies that unfolded in pursuit of getting to the world’s ceiling by the determined mountaineers.
Personal opinion derived from the book
It is evident that the tragedy that took place in Mount Everest was an example of an artificial disaster that was manageable if only the set guidelines that have been stipulated to guide such expeditions had been followed to the latter.
The author has in a nutshell pointed out that some of the safety guidelines that had been formulated by the most experienced mountaineers in the world had been violated. It is evident that the violation was done because of the competition that was prevailing between the existing companies that provided the mountaineers with guides who led the mountaineers throughout the ascent on the mountain.
This competition has resulted in some of the companies compromising the well-being of the mountaineers, some of whom do not have enough training and experience to take part in events such as ascending to the summit of Mount Everest (Krakauer 122).
Issues that have arisen from this book
It is evident that this book was a success in its release as it sold over a million copies. However, despite the success a lot of criticism has been made by renowned mountaineers and people who had also participated in the expedition in which they had escaped the ordeal. The critics have disputed the material facts that Krakauer has relayed in the book with regard to one of the guides of Russian origin who had been mandated with guiding the team throughout the ascent of Mount Everest.
It is evident that in the book, the guide had descended the mountain ahead of his clients in which his motive was to find help and lead a rescue mission in which he would have saved more adventurers when the adventure turned sour. Krakauer in his book seems to question the rationale that this guide had applied in which he had decided to leave his clients alone on the mountain, despite fully knowing that they lacked the experience to handle the situations that were prevailing at that time.
He questions the guide’s judgment in not having used supplement oxygen that was an essential component in the paraphernalia that were required by the adventurers. He rebukes the interaction techniques that were applied by the guide in his interaction with the clients. He finally questions the mountaineering gears that were used by the adventurers in their quest to ascend the mountain to its summit.
On the other hand a number of professional renowned mountaineers like Galen Rowell have criticized Krakauer’s account in his narration by faulting it as irrational and clouded by individual judgment that is prejudicial in retelling exactly what happened in the fateful adventure.
He points out the inconsistencies that are in Krakauer’s account in which he observes that Krakauer was sleeping in his tent and he had no idea what the guide was doing. It is evident that as Krakauer was sleeping, the guide was busy rescuing some of the climbers who were in dire need of medical attention. Galen reckons that the actions of the guide were heroic and he had used his wisdom to forebode the shortcoming that arose from the expedition.
Krakauer , Jones. Into Thin Air: A Personal Account of the Mt. Everest Disaster. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2009. Print.