The story of Chris McCandless is a tale that captivates its audience for many reasons, however, always leaves the reader feeling as though they have been deprived of something that they are very used to getting; a definitive message. Chris McCandless’s journey into the Alaskan wilderness is not an entirely satisfying tale, and this is due in large part to the lack of a “moral”, or a lesson that readers should take away from the book. By reading only one version of the story, a reader might be placated by an author who wove it to be a lesson against foraging for plants, or in another, a lecture on the folly of running off into the wilderness as a young, inexperienced person with limited supplies. However, after reading multiple sources, it is …show more content…
In this way, the very ideals of ‘closeness to nature” and “self reliance” were what caused him to die, resulting in the irony that so many people find fascinating. In looking at the situation without considering the transcendentalist perspective, Chris McCandless was simply a young man who was stupid enough to walk into a very dangerous situation without proper preparation. The idea that McCandless was just an ill-equipped and ignorant individual is exemplified when Shaun Callarman says “I think that Chris McCandless was bright and ignorant at the same time. He had no common sense, and he had no business going into Alaska with his Romantic silliness. He made a lot of mistakes based on ignorance. I don’t admire him at all for his courage nor his noble ideas. Really, I think he was just plain crazy”. Interestingly enough, this is the point of view taken by many Alaskans, the majority of which view McCandless with contempt for his failure to properly prepare for his journey. (George Mason University English Department). This more pragmatic viewpoint is in sharp contrast to the romanization that most journalists use when referring to the case. In the argument against transcendentalist values, it is interesting that Alaskans, who typically live in conditions that emphasize the importance of the individual and of nature should be the ones to rebuke a “prophet” of