Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer is a book that stirs the senses and awakens the inner rebel of every person. Krakauer shares this enchanting story of a young adventurous nomad who longs for adventure and succeeds in his search, but then his success becomes short-lived. The story itself is captivating, but Krakauer captivates his world wide audience mainly by the unique structure and style that he uses to create Into the Wild. His creative structure is made known from the beginning. Questions about his technique are aroused. My question lies in how Krakauer subtly makes his reader’s view Chris McCandless in a more positive way then a negative way throughout the book. Even after stating, “Through most of the book, I have tried—and largely succeeded, I think—to minimize my authorial presence” (Author’s note 2), I find that through hidden structures and creative writing schemes, Krakauer has largely succeeded in doing the exact opposite. His authorial presence and point of view is in fact flowing throughout his book.
Krakauer uses a few subtle strategies to make the reader acknowledge that McCandless isn’t half as crazy as he might have seemed to be at first. One strategy that Krakauer uses is in his description
Another question that arises is Krakauer’s usage of himself within the book. In chapters fourteen and fifteen, our author drops the story of McCandless completely and turns the focus onto himself. Why does he do this? Many readers would say that he’s trying to show a connection between Chris McCandless and himself. I believe this is only part of the reason he adds these two descriptive chapters. By adding these two chapters of events, Krakauer subtly persuades his audience to think positively toward Chris and his adventures.
Example Essays Home
