Jon Krakauer’s purpose of writing “Into the Wild” was to explain, in detail, what happened to Chris during his four-year journey. He also wanted to explain how he died in Alaska. Krakauer intended to motivate his audience to stop thinking about physical things and do what makes them happy, by giving an explanation for Chris’s actions. “Make a radical change in your lifestyle and begin to boldly do things which you previously never have thought of doing, or too hesitant to attempt.” (pg. 56)
Jon Krakauer establishes his ethos by writing about his own time of misfortune while climbing the Devils Thumb in Alaska. When he heard about Chris and his death, it must have resonated with Krakauer. When he first heard about Chris, he got obsessed with finding out what happened, and how he died. He…show more content… And he wasn’t a nutcase, he wasn’t a sociopath, he wasn’t an outcast.” (pg. 85) Krakauer is concluding that Chris is perfectly sane. When Krakauer published the article about Chris, he received a lot of letters saying that Chris had a death wish and that he was suicidal. However, Krakauer disagrees because he had a similar experience to Chris, thus, he relates to him more. He doesn’t think of Chris as a crazy person, he thinks of Chris as an adventurer. I agree with Krakauer, Chris was pretty smart, he knew what he was doing, he was always very resourceful throughout his journey. Even though he was very egotistical throughout his life, and overconfident in his abilities at times, he was a smart man.
I think Krakauer’s personal experience in Alaska only adds to Chris’s story. Krakauer’s experience allows the reader to better connect Krakauer to Chris. And the reader can better understand why Krakauer feels the way he does towards Chris and understand why Krakauer wrote about
