Throughout the novel, Krakauer uses strategies to demonstrate comparisons between himself and Christopher McCandless. These comparisons effectively show that Chris was sane enough to make his own decisions regarding Alaska. One of the reasons why Krakauer wrote this book was because he experienced a natural liking for McCandless. Ever since his initial encounter with McCandless’s story while working at the Outside magazine company, his affinity towards the young adventurer grew by leaps and bounds. This affinity came from the very similar experiences the two were involved in. In the author 's note from Jon Krakauer, he warns, “I interrupt McCandless 's story with fragments of my own youth. I do so in the hope that my experiences will throw …show more content…
Krakauer’s anecdote illustrates how he was drawn to the story of Mccandless and how Chris’s actions, thoughts, and mental processes came naturally. He informs us of the inevitable accidents that can occur while hiking the wilderness, as well as his own mindset during his similarly troubled, youthful years. Krakauer went through similar mental growth as Chris, but had the fortune of surviving where Chris did not. Unlike McCandless, he didn’t have a single minded focus of living an idealistic life inspired by a great such as Jack London or Thoreau, but Krakauer did yearn for something larger than himself. Both he and Chris shared the desire of personal morality. That belief allowed Krakauer to further develop the proof that McCandless was an actual person with legitimate thoughts and concerns. Even the best and most experienced explorers face difficulties in the wild, which is what Krakauer is trying to get at. Going through the same experiences, enhances Krakauer 's credibility and adds the understanding that Chris was not as insane as