Summary Of Into The Wild By Jon Krakauer

Understandably, most would agree that one of the most important aspects of being human is forming connections and relationships with people. In fact, it is one of most people’s greatest desires to make connections and form relationships with people as a result of those connections. However, Chris McCandless seemed to want the exact opposite of that. Chris wanted something bigger. He had a desire that, for him, no kind of relationship with any other person could satisfy. Chris decided to cut off all connections not out of selfishness, but because of his burning desire to experience life in its simplest beauty. Moreover, he was not the only one who set out on a journey like this—others with stories similar to that of Chris’ help explain the true

One of the most important stories of these is that of a man named Carl McCunn, who travelled to a fairly secluded area in Alaska with the intention of staying in the wilderness for several months to take photos of the wildlife. However, he forgot to arrange for someone to pick him up, and as a result, he lost his life. The author includes words from a coworker of Carl’s, and his personality can obviously be compared to Chris’. Krakauer quotes from this coworker, “’Carl was a friendly, extremely popular, down-home sort of guy,’ Stoppel recalls. ‘And he seemed like a smart guy. But there was a side to him that was a little bit dreamy, a little bit out of touch with reality’” (Krakauer 81). It was this kind of personality that drove both McCandless and McCunn to venture out into the wild. They both wanted to experience the wilderness with minimal interruptions. Although there are clearly significant differences between the two, the similarities help one to develop a better understanding of the thoughts behind Chris’ decision to travel to Alaska. One of the biggest similarities between Chris and Carl is that they both had a desire to live a certain kind of life out in the wild. Nature in its simplest form brought them joy that could not be felt elsewhere. Of course, there are other important stories that help better explain McCandless, and Jon Krakauer is sure to mention these. He states, “There are similarities among Rosellini, Waterman, McCunn, and McCandless. … Like Waterman and McCunn, he displayed a staggering paucity of common sense. … And unlike McCunn, he didn’t go into the bush assuming someone would automatically appear to save his bacon before he came to grief. … And he wasn’t a nutcase, he wasn’t a sociopath, he wasn’t an outcast. McCandless was something else…”