What do you think?
Rate this book
Vào trong hoang dã
Hơn hai mươi tuổi đời, gia đình giàu có, học vấn cao và một tương lại rộng mở phía trước, vậy mà Christopher McCandless (hay Alexander Supertramp như anh tự gọi mình) đã từ bỏ tất cả để dấn thân vào hành trình đơn độc xuyên qua hết thảy các vùng hoang dã của Bắc Mỹ. Dưới ngòi bút sống động của Jon Krakauer, Vào trong hoang dã, cuốn sách mô tả những trải nghiệm phi thường đó của Christopher McCandless, đã trở thành một cuốn tự truyện nổi tiếng, một tác phẩm khó quên về thiên nhiên và phiêu lưu, ngợi ca một cuộc sống tận hiến và cảm động. Câu chuyện được dựng thành phim vào năm 2007 ở Mỹ.
386 pages, Paperback
First published January 13, 1996
15070 people are currently reading
676195 people want to read
About the author
Jon Krakauer
56 books16.5k followersJon Krakauer is an American writer and mountaineer, well-known for outdoor and mountain-climbing writing.
https://www.facebook.com/jonkrakauer
https://www.facebook.com/jonkrakauer
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33,027 reviews
May 23, 2025
This book is a wonderful cautionary tale. I will probably read it again with my daughter when she is old enough to discuss it. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the reason most people will read the book and see the new upcoming movie, is for a different reason. Chris McCandless (in the book, and from what I understand in the movie), is a hero and courageous for flying in the face of everything he grew up with to find a better way. A young man unhappy with the materialism, hunger, and waste in the world; angry with his father for not being a perfect father to him; intellectually superior, a fantastic athlete in top condition... and yet a young man who died because of his own decisions and his own actions. He cut off ties to his family, hitchhiked and worked his way to Alaska, headed "into the wild" in April 1992, and was found dead in August 1992 most probably from starvation. How wonderful to "fight against the odds" and "ask real questions". Unfortunately, Chris didn't really fight against any odds, he took the easy way out by cutting off real relationships. Chris may have asked real questions, but he denied real people the opportunity to answer them in any way, because he had already decided what was "the right way". This is not heroic. It is immaturity. It is tragic and sad, yes, but not heroic or courageous.
After reading the book, I think Chris died because he was foolish. Intellectually bright, yes. Athletically gifted, yes. But he had no wisdom. Wisdom has been defined as "skill in living", and wisdom is not always bestowed on the young and the healthy and the intellectually smart. The opposite of wisdom is foolishness. His anger and questioning drove him not to wisdom, but to self-reliance and an overweening arrogance in his own ability to "get through it". Well, we see the result of those decisions and those attitudes.... to quote Darwin, Chris is an example of how "survival of the fittest" applies. Chris was not "fit", therefore he did not "survive". But why wasn't he fit? He was smart and young and gifted in many ways, but he chose to abandon relationships and abandon those who loved him and create himself anew with no relationships and no ties. He walked away from people who loved him, made friends with people who came to love him, and walked away from all of that to find his answers "in the wild" on his own. The way away from love and relationship leads not to life, but indeed to death. And death is what Chris got.
The book quotes Chris' mother as saying, "I haven't prayed since we lost him." (pg. 202) An older man who befriended Chris, Ronald Franz, also says, "When Alex left for Alaska, I prayed. I asked God to keep his finger on the shoulder of that one; I told him that boy was special. But he let Alex die. So on December 26, when I learned what had happened, I renounced the Lord. I withdrew my church membership and became an atheist. I decided I couldn't believe in a God who would let something that terrible happen to a boy like Alex." (pg. 60) But God didn't do anything to Chris, except let him do as he wanted? If Chris sought real answers to his hard questions, God is there, and God can help, but you have to know you need help and submit to someone wiser than you. Chris McCandless never submitted willingly to anyone, and he certainly never admitted anyone else had teaching or wisdom for him. He was smarter than everyone else, better able to see the truth than anyone else. So the heritage Chris McCandless left is one that drives his mother to stop praying, and converts an old man to atheism. Is this the heritage anyone would want?
So read this book, but read it with questions in mind. Why are we lauding a young man as a hero who was actually a foolish man? What kind of society are we in where real courage and real heroism are somehow playing 2nd fiddle to selfishness and arrogance? When are you so intellectually intelligent that you become stupid? Is there any time when foolish decisions could be called "courageous"? In a search for truth and what really matters in life, is it acceptable to think nothing of hurting those people who are most vulnerable to you? When you die, will the way you lived your life cause others to abandon their faith or grow in their faith? Is it ever courageous to be selfish and think only of yourself? Is it harder to walk away from a relationship, or to stay in a relationship and work on making it better? Would you ever teach anyone else that the way to have real relationships is to limit yourself only to those people who cannot ever hurt you?
Real courage, real heroism comes when you love others and you serve others. Real courage has nothing selfish in it. Fathers and husbands who remain with their families and provide for them, even though they would rather have a mid-life crisis and leave it all, they are courageous and heroic. They remain, they work, they don't father or husband perfectly, but they remain in difficult relationships. It courageous to stay in the hard parts of life, and try. Mothers and wives who sacrifice and serve again and again and again without books being written about them, without thanks, but who continue to love and give of themselves to others. That is courageous. It is hard to stay in messy relationships. It is easy to leave. It is courageous to stay and do hard things. It is easy to leave and do what you want.
So, let's read this book, but read it as a cautionary tale. This is what happens when you seemingly 'have it all', but have not love. When you die, will people be driven to become atheists? Will people stop praying when you are dead? Or will you live a life of wisdom and love? Will you leave behind you a heritage of godly love and service? Will people pray more because of the example you left them? Will they be more loving, better mothers or fathers or sisters or brothers? Or will they become angry and arrogant and foolish? Yes, this is a good book to read. But let's read it for the right reasons and with the right questions.
[NOTE: In the book, and in the movie, the author proposes that Chris ate some poison berries which caused his death. But tests have been made around the area, and plants that would have been available to Chris were tested, and no toxic berries or plants have been found. The truth is probably that he starved. Too few calories coming in, high expenditure of calories for hunting and keeping warm resulted eventually in such a calorie deficit that he died.]
Some good articles I found on Chris McCandless include:
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/ap...
http://nmge.gmu.edu/textandcommunity/...
Alaskan Park Ranger Peter Christian wrote: “I am exposed continually to what I will call the ‘McCandless Phenomenon.’ People, nearly always young men, come to Alaska to challenge themselves against an unforgiving wilderness landscape where convenience of access and possibility of rescue are practically nonexistent […:] When you consider McCandless from my perspective, you quickly see that what he did wasn’t even particularly daring, just stupid, tragic, and inconsiderate. First off, he spent very little time learning how to actually live in the wild. He arrived at the Stampede Trail without even a map of the area. If he [had:] had a good map he could have walked out of his predicament […:] Essentially, Chris McCandless committed suicide.”[18:] Some may argue that this is what he wanted all along, given his troubled past
****************
An update as of Sept 2013 as to how McCandless died. See http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs... which documents the poison contained in wild potato seeds. Consuming these seeds introduces a neurotoxin into the body which results in lathyrism. This condition causes gradual paralysis which ultimately made McCandless very weak, unable to stand or walk, and thus unable to forage or hunt for food.
After reading the book, I think Chris died because he was foolish. Intellectually bright, yes. Athletically gifted, yes. But he had no wisdom. Wisdom has been defined as "skill in living", and wisdom is not always bestowed on the young and the healthy and the intellectually smart. The opposite of wisdom is foolishness. His anger and questioning drove him not to wisdom, but to self-reliance and an overweening arrogance in his own ability to "get through it". Well, we see the result of those decisions and those attitudes.... to quote Darwin, Chris is an example of how "survival of the fittest" applies. Chris was not "fit", therefore he did not "survive". But why wasn't he fit? He was smart and young and gifted in many ways, but he chose to abandon relationships and abandon those who loved him and create himself anew with no relationships and no ties. He walked away from people who loved him, made friends with people who came to love him, and walked away from all of that to find his answers "in the wild" on his own. The way away from love and relationship leads not to life, but indeed to death. And death is what Chris got.
The book quotes Chris' mother as saying, "I haven't prayed since we lost him." (pg. 202) An older man who befriended Chris, Ronald Franz, also says, "When Alex left for Alaska, I prayed. I asked God to keep his finger on the shoulder of that one; I told him that boy was special. But he let Alex die. So on December 26, when I learned what had happened, I renounced the Lord. I withdrew my church membership and became an atheist. I decided I couldn't believe in a God who would let something that terrible happen to a boy like Alex." (pg. 60) But God didn't do anything to Chris, except let him do as he wanted? If Chris sought real answers to his hard questions, God is there, and God can help, but you have to know you need help and submit to someone wiser than you. Chris McCandless never submitted willingly to anyone, and he certainly never admitted anyone else had teaching or wisdom for him. He was smarter than everyone else, better able to see the truth than anyone else. So the heritage Chris McCandless left is one that drives his mother to stop praying, and converts an old man to atheism. Is this the heritage anyone would want?
So read this book, but read it with questions in mind. Why are we lauding a young man as a hero who was actually a foolish man? What kind of society are we in where real courage and real heroism are somehow playing 2nd fiddle to selfishness and arrogance? When are you so intellectually intelligent that you become stupid? Is there any time when foolish decisions could be called "courageous"? In a search for truth and what really matters in life, is it acceptable to think nothing of hurting those people who are most vulnerable to you? When you die, will the way you lived your life cause others to abandon their faith or grow in their faith? Is it ever courageous to be selfish and think only of yourself? Is it harder to walk away from a relationship, or to stay in a relationship and work on making it better? Would you ever teach anyone else that the way to have real relationships is to limit yourself only to those people who cannot ever hurt you?
Real courage, real heroism comes when you love others and you serve others. Real courage has nothing selfish in it. Fathers and husbands who remain with their families and provide for them, even though they would rather have a mid-life crisis and leave it all, they are courageous and heroic. They remain, they work, they don't father or husband perfectly, but they remain in difficult relationships. It courageous to stay in the hard parts of life, and try. Mothers and wives who sacrifice and serve again and again and again without books being written about them, without thanks, but who continue to love and give of themselves to others. That is courageous. It is hard to stay in messy relationships. It is easy to leave. It is courageous to stay and do hard things. It is easy to leave and do what you want.
So, let's read this book, but read it as a cautionary tale. This is what happens when you seemingly 'have it all', but have not love. When you die, will people be driven to become atheists? Will people stop praying when you are dead? Or will you live a life of wisdom and love? Will you leave behind you a heritage of godly love and service? Will people pray more because of the example you left them? Will they be more loving, better mothers or fathers or sisters or brothers? Or will they become angry and arrogant and foolish? Yes, this is a good book to read. But let's read it for the right reasons and with the right questions.
[NOTE: In the book, and in the movie, the author proposes that Chris ate some poison berries which caused his death. But tests have been made around the area, and plants that would have been available to Chris were tested, and no toxic berries or plants have been found. The truth is probably that he starved. Too few calories coming in, high expenditure of calories for hunting and keeping warm resulted eventually in such a calorie deficit that he died.]
Some good articles I found on Chris McCandless include:
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/ap...
http://nmge.gmu.edu/textandcommunity/...
Alaskan Park Ranger Peter Christian wrote: “I am exposed continually to what I will call the ‘McCandless Phenomenon.’ People, nearly always young men, come to Alaska to challenge themselves against an unforgiving wilderness landscape where convenience of access and possibility of rescue are practically nonexistent […:] When you consider McCandless from my perspective, you quickly see that what he did wasn’t even particularly daring, just stupid, tragic, and inconsiderate. First off, he spent very little time learning how to actually live in the wild. He arrived at the Stampede Trail without even a map of the area. If he [had:] had a good map he could have walked out of his predicament […:] Essentially, Chris McCandless committed suicide.”[18:] Some may argue that this is what he wanted all along, given his troubled past
****************
An update as of Sept 2013 as to how McCandless died. See http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs... which documents the poison contained in wild potato seeds. Consuming these seeds introduces a neurotoxin into the body which results in lathyrism. This condition causes gradual paralysis which ultimately made McCandless very weak, unable to stand or walk, and thus unable to forage or hunt for food.
January 4, 2020
"I now walk into the wild."
- Christopher McCandless (1968-1992)
I live a life, I suspect, that is much like yours. Wake up, go to work, come home, eat dinner, go to bed. At the end of this weekly desert, there might be a drink or ten to celebrate the victory over another five days of soul-crushing drudgery.
I am a desk jockey. A paper pusher. I mean that literally; I sit in my office, and when people peer inside, they will see me moving a sheet of paper from one side to the other. It looks, to the untrained eye, like valuable labor.
When I get the chance, though, I head to the mountains, to the wild. I love the away-ness of these trips. At the risk of sounding absurdly curmudgeonly, I like getting away from the crush of humanity (and I'm sure the crush of humanity appreciates my temporary absence).
There was at time when my friends and I would head out west every summer. We picked a destination (isolated, challenging), packed the car, and plunged into the wilderness. We undertook silly risks, because we were younger and we laughed at consequences, or at the possibility that there were consequences. Once, a little later on, we gathered around a campfire, four of us, and swore - like characters from a young adult novel - that we'd always do this: that we'd always head out to the mountains together.
Then we got older. My friends married, they started having kids, and the mountains became a memory, a slideshow of pictures that showed up on the screen savers of our computers. Friends with whom I'd jumped off cliffs, slid down glaciers, and climbed rocks matured overnight into sober professionals, husbands, and fathers. It was remarkable how age engendered caution, and squelched the desire for adventure.
That was my mindset when I picked up Into the Wild.
Jon Krakauer's classic is, to put it mildly, a polarizing book. Based on the people I've surveyed, I've found that you either love it or you hate it, and whether you love it or hate it will be determined by what you think about Christopher McCandless, the young man at the center of Into the Wild. You will be taken in by Chris's literate, philosophical, iconoclastic, boundary-pushing vagabondism. Or you will be sickened by his selfishness, his self-pity, and the way he left a shattered family in his wake.
Either way, you will have a vivid response.
Upon graduating from Emory University, and instead of going on to law school (which was my choice), McCandless gave away $25,000 to charity and began his life as a tramp (or hobo, as they sometimes like to be called). I was in sixth grade when McCandless walked into the Alaskan wilderness and never returned. He was 24.
The power of Into the Wild is directly attributable to Krakauer's empathy for his subject. Krakauer is a solid adventure writer, but he's not a prose stylist. Rather, he uses his own life experiences to connect with Chris on a very intimate, personal level. He does not attempt any faux objectivity that is often the hallmark of "serious" serious journalism. Instead, Krakauer admits, straight up, that he saw his younger self in Chris, with the exception that Krakauer survived his youth, while Chris did not. For instance, there is an autobiographical section in Into the Wild where Krakauer tells his story about climbing the Devil's Thumb. This could easily have been a self-serving digression, but Krakauer uses that experience, and the vividness of his memory, to explore the the compulsions that drove Chris McCandless to follow his unique path to his destiny.
I think Chris, in his own way, was a towering figure; he was the person I would like to be, if I had more guts and less excuses. He was a smart kid, a college grad, who came from money. His parents were messed up, but really, whose parents aren't? After college, instead of going to law school (don't go to law school, by the way), he gave away $25,000, burned his credit cards, and set out to see the west.
Whatever else you call him, you can't call him a poser. Like everyone, he had his share of dreams and demons, and he set out to follow his dreams and fight his demons. There's something to be said for what he put his parent through. Still, the world forces us to be our own person. He went forward the best way he knew how, defining himself along the way. The tragedy, of course, is that the lessons he learned - about the value of friends and family - he learned too late.
I don't really need to defend Chris. Krakauer does that. He is unabashedly in his corner, defending his choices, his skills, his desire to go alone to the far places, like John Muir before him. Chris McCandless was himself, fully and completely, which is saying a lot, in this day and age. Or any day and age. He was part adventurer, part philosopher, and part monk (the monk part fascinates Krakauer, who spends a lot of time wondering whether Chris died a virgin).
I suppose a brief note on the movie, directed by Sean Penn, is in order. While I found it poetic and inspiring, the movie focuses too much on Chris's effect on the various people he meets on his journeys. In a way, Chris becomes some kind of wandering apostle, healing and helping those he meets along his path, before he dies a martyr's death in Alaska, a vision from a Don Maclean song ("the world was never meant for one as beautiful as you..."). The book, on the other hand, keeps Chris firmly grounded as a human being. Krakauer admires Chris, to be sure, but he does not neglect the warts. (However, Krakauer sharply dismisses those armchair psychiatrists who want to diagnose Chris with a mental disorder. I'm glad he does. I think it's saying soemething about the conformity of our society that anyone who bucks the trend (he gave up law school!?) is called mad).
In the end, Chris was one of those rare people who wanted to know the world intimately, and in the process of discovering those secrets, was killed by that same world. Maybe there was something quixotic or foolish in his quest; maybe he should have taken a job, taken a wife, found a safe desk behind which to grow old. Or maybe there is something foolish in us, to believe that we can outlive the world with our caution.
- Christopher McCandless (1968-1992)
I live a life, I suspect, that is much like yours. Wake up, go to work, come home, eat dinner, go to bed. At the end of this weekly desert, there might be a drink or ten to celebrate the victory over another five days of soul-crushing drudgery.
I am a desk jockey. A paper pusher. I mean that literally; I sit in my office, and when people peer inside, they will see me moving a sheet of paper from one side to the other. It looks, to the untrained eye, like valuable labor.
When I get the chance, though, I head to the mountains, to the wild. I love the away-ness of these trips. At the risk of sounding absurdly curmudgeonly, I like getting away from the crush of humanity (and I'm sure the crush of humanity appreciates my temporary absence).
There was at time when my friends and I would head out west every summer. We picked a destination (isolated, challenging), packed the car, and plunged into the wilderness. We undertook silly risks, because we were younger and we laughed at consequences, or at the possibility that there were consequences. Once, a little later on, we gathered around a campfire, four of us, and swore - like characters from a young adult novel - that we'd always do this: that we'd always head out to the mountains together.
Then we got older. My friends married, they started having kids, and the mountains became a memory, a slideshow of pictures that showed up on the screen savers of our computers. Friends with whom I'd jumped off cliffs, slid down glaciers, and climbed rocks matured overnight into sober professionals, husbands, and fathers. It was remarkable how age engendered caution, and squelched the desire for adventure.
That was my mindset when I picked up Into the Wild.
Jon Krakauer's classic is, to put it mildly, a polarizing book. Based on the people I've surveyed, I've found that you either love it or you hate it, and whether you love it or hate it will be determined by what you think about Christopher McCandless, the young man at the center of Into the Wild. You will be taken in by Chris's literate, philosophical, iconoclastic, boundary-pushing vagabondism. Or you will be sickened by his selfishness, his self-pity, and the way he left a shattered family in his wake.
Either way, you will have a vivid response.
Upon graduating from Emory University, and instead of going on to law school (which was my choice), McCandless gave away $25,000 to charity and began his life as a tramp (or hobo, as they sometimes like to be called). I was in sixth grade when McCandless walked into the Alaskan wilderness and never returned. He was 24.
The power of Into the Wild is directly attributable to Krakauer's empathy for his subject. Krakauer is a solid adventure writer, but he's not a prose stylist. Rather, he uses his own life experiences to connect with Chris on a very intimate, personal level. He does not attempt any faux objectivity that is often the hallmark of "serious" serious journalism. Instead, Krakauer admits, straight up, that he saw his younger self in Chris, with the exception that Krakauer survived his youth, while Chris did not. For instance, there is an autobiographical section in Into the Wild where Krakauer tells his story about climbing the Devil's Thumb. This could easily have been a self-serving digression, but Krakauer uses that experience, and the vividness of his memory, to explore the the compulsions that drove Chris McCandless to follow his unique path to his destiny.
I think Chris, in his own way, was a towering figure; he was the person I would like to be, if I had more guts and less excuses. He was a smart kid, a college grad, who came from money. His parents were messed up, but really, whose parents aren't? After college, instead of going to law school (don't go to law school, by the way), he gave away $25,000, burned his credit cards, and set out to see the west.
Whatever else you call him, you can't call him a poser. Like everyone, he had his share of dreams and demons, and he set out to follow his dreams and fight his demons. There's something to be said for what he put his parent through. Still, the world forces us to be our own person. He went forward the best way he knew how, defining himself along the way. The tragedy, of course, is that the lessons he learned - about the value of friends and family - he learned too late.
I don't really need to defend Chris. Krakauer does that. He is unabashedly in his corner, defending his choices, his skills, his desire to go alone to the far places, like John Muir before him. Chris McCandless was himself, fully and completely, which is saying a lot, in this day and age. Or any day and age. He was part adventurer, part philosopher, and part monk (the monk part fascinates Krakauer, who spends a lot of time wondering whether Chris died a virgin).
I suppose a brief note on the movie, directed by Sean Penn, is in order. While I found it poetic and inspiring, the movie focuses too much on Chris's effect on the various people he meets on his journeys. In a way, Chris becomes some kind of wandering apostle, healing and helping those he meets along his path, before he dies a martyr's death in Alaska, a vision from a Don Maclean song ("the world was never meant for one as beautiful as you..."). The book, on the other hand, keeps Chris firmly grounded as a human being. Krakauer admires Chris, to be sure, but he does not neglect the warts. (However, Krakauer sharply dismisses those armchair psychiatrists who want to diagnose Chris with a mental disorder. I'm glad he does. I think it's saying soemething about the conformity of our society that anyone who bucks the trend (he gave up law school!?) is called mad).
In the end, Chris was one of those rare people who wanted to know the world intimately, and in the process of discovering those secrets, was killed by that same world. Maybe there was something quixotic or foolish in his quest; maybe he should have taken a job, taken a wife, found a safe desk behind which to grow old. Or maybe there is something foolish in us, to believe that we can outlive the world with our caution.
December 1, 2018
okay. lets address the elephant on goodreads, which is the common theme of essentially bashing chris mccandless in reviews. i have seen so many ranting about how irresponsible and selfish and arrogant and unprepared he was. and i mean, theyre not wrong, but that honestly has nothing to do with the book?
what i love most about this is how objective krakauer is. he neither praises nor critiques mccandless, but presents the facts regarding an unfortunate event in a very interesting and fascinating way. which leads me to believe that many people did not understand the nature of this book.
yes, mccandless thought so highly of himself that he literally went out into the alaskan wilderness, equipped with only a plant guide, and felt confident that he could survive. yes, he ignored the number one rule of boys scouts - to be prepared. yes, he only thought about how his actions affected himself. but man, the manner in which krakauer tells chris' story is so gripping that i couldnt help but get invested in everything that happened. this book reads like a true crime story, but where the only crime committed was a serious lack of judgement by a very misguided individual.
so it seems massively unfair to penalise the book itself because of disagreeing with what a young man did. but hey, to each their own.
↠ 4 stars
what i love most about this is how objective krakauer is. he neither praises nor critiques mccandless, but presents the facts regarding an unfortunate event in a very interesting and fascinating way. which leads me to believe that many people did not understand the nature of this book.
yes, mccandless thought so highly of himself that he literally went out into the alaskan wilderness, equipped with only a plant guide, and felt confident that he could survive. yes, he ignored the number one rule of boys scouts - to be prepared. yes, he only thought about how his actions affected himself. but man, the manner in which krakauer tells chris' story is so gripping that i couldnt help but get invested in everything that happened. this book reads like a true crime story, but where the only crime committed was a serious lack of judgement by a very misguided individual.
so it seems massively unfair to penalise the book itself because of disagreeing with what a young man did. but hey, to each their own.
↠ 4 stars
December 4, 2013
Overall, I was pretty disappointed with this book. The genesis of the book was an in-depth magazine article, and I suspect that the article was superb. But I just don't think there's enough here to warrant an entire book. As evidence, I point to several lengthy chapters that have nothing to do with the underlying story--they discuss other people who have gone "into the wild" and, surprisingly, Krakauer includes a whole chapter about himself.
My other problem is that I found myself unable to identify or empathize with the central character here. I think that Chris McCandless was not much more than a privileged, entitled, selfish, and undeniably intelligent person who threw everything away and nearly destroyed his family for reasons that weren't any clearer by the end of the book than they were at the beginning. I worried far more about his parents and his sister, who he called his "best friend," than I did about him.
I ended up "finishing" the book by skimming the last 1/3, or maybe even the last 1/2. I almost gave this only 1 star but decided to go with 2 because I want to give Krakauer the benefit of the doubt--it's a well-written book, I just don't think it needed to be written at all.
My other problem is that I found myself unable to identify or empathize with the central character here. I think that Chris McCandless was not much more than a privileged, entitled, selfish, and undeniably intelligent person who threw everything away and nearly destroyed his family for reasons that weren't any clearer by the end of the book than they were at the beginning. I worried far more about his parents and his sister, who he called his "best friend," than I did about him.
I ended up "finishing" the book by skimming the last 1/3, or maybe even the last 1/2. I almost gave this only 1 star but decided to go with 2 because I want to give Krakauer the benefit of the doubt--it's a well-written book, I just don't think it needed to be written at all.
November 7, 2025
Chris McCandless didn't want to prove anything to anyone; he just wanted to be free and live as he saw fit. So far, from the image of the bohemian and thoughtless teenager, Jon Krakauer portrays him to us as an intelligent and obstinate young man with remarkable abilities to gather people around him. He leaves those who have met him during his travels with a feeling of great sociability, which contrasts significantly with the need for solitude that he regularly showed, a slight desire to owe nothing to anyone, and a determination to find solutions to his problems.
When he leaves his family at a young age after high school, he goes from odd job to odd job, squats where the wind carries him, and fate brings him down. He must have had a lucky star because his meetings always seem benevolent, and this is perhaps one of the elements that will encourage him to push his adventures even further. His thirst for self-sufficiency will guide him to Alaska, where he will spend several months, ultimately leading to the fatal outcome we are familiar with.
The author breaks stereotypes and conducts a genuine investigation by understanding the personality of this young man, who aspires to escape the constraints of modern life. Far from judgment and bias, he analyzes the situation by comparing it to other life paths similar to Chris McCandless's. It also seems that his death is still a little enigmatic because many news sites on the subject are always looking for genuine reasons.
That's a genuine interest in this book, which brings us back tirelessly to the harsh reality of life outside civilization.
When he leaves his family at a young age after high school, he goes from odd job to odd job, squats where the wind carries him, and fate brings him down. He must have had a lucky star because his meetings always seem benevolent, and this is perhaps one of the elements that will encourage him to push his adventures even further. His thirst for self-sufficiency will guide him to Alaska, where he will spend several months, ultimately leading to the fatal outcome we are familiar with.
The author breaks stereotypes and conducts a genuine investigation by understanding the personality of this young man, who aspires to escape the constraints of modern life. Far from judgment and bias, he analyzes the situation by comparing it to other life paths similar to Chris McCandless's. It also seems that his death is still a little enigmatic because many news sites on the subject are always looking for genuine reasons.
That's a genuine interest in this book, which brings us back tirelessly to the harsh reality of life outside civilization.
September 23, 2017
In 1992, roughly around the same time Chris McCandless was living out his final days in the Alaskan wilderness, I would have been enjoying the summer holidays before embarking on my final year at school, contemplating the big wide world and what I was going to do with the rest of my life. It wasn't until watching Sean Penn's film in 2008 I would learn of Chris's story, a story that moved me, immensely.
I always presumed Jon Krakauer's book would be some huge epic, but was surprised on finding out it's a little over 200 pages. I simply had to read it, just don't know why it took me so long.
It's going to be difficult to review this without making my own thoughts on Chris known first. Although it isn't as straightforward as this, taking everything into consideration, if there is to be a camp criticism and a camp McCandless, then I firmly sit with McCandless. He was an awe-inspiring bright young man, who simply broke free from the establishment to follow his own path, a path, going by both book and film that was simply stunning. I know there are people that criticized his adventure as reckless, stupid, dangerous and well unequipped for the treacherous landscape of wild Alaska, and were even angry with him, that he deserved what was coming to him, disrespecting nature. Let's not forget something, he probably died a slow agonizing death that you wouldn't wish on anybody, why the anger from people who didn't even know him? it was nobody else's business what Chris chose to undertake. As the old saying goes, it's a free country. And he was just that, free.
I do feel for his family of course, I can't begin to imagine the pain and anguish they would have had to injure, and the fact he didn't try to contact his sister Karine, who he was dearly close to, was strange. I just hope his family came to eventually realize that the two years Chris spent on the road he would have been immensely happy. That's got to count for something. Had he gone on to work, no doubt well paid work, you get the impression he just wouldn't want to be there. Had Chris been some wacko or mentally incapacitated person I would have taken far more pity over his story, but he wasn't, he was highly intelligent and knew exactly what he was doing. That's why, although he came to a sad end, I am still on the whole, happy for the guy.
The strongest parts of the book for me are actually not the last months in Alaska (which had to be recreated based on Chris’ diary and the evidence found at the site of his death), but the memories of people whom Chris had met on his travels, with whom he had caught rides, worked and stayed, struck up friendships. I was especially moved by the generosity of strangers and by Chris’s run in with 81 year old Ron Franz, whom he managed to convince to give up the monotonous life and take up adventure. These two years of traveling had no boundaries, no obligations, no limitations, no expectations. Just exploring the land, exploring life, and himself.
Jon Krakauer also included memories from his own youth, trying to draw comparisons with Chris, along with some other historical journey's similar to what McCandless embarked on.
Chris was a keen reader, and used literature as a way to inspire him on the road, there were quotes from the likes of Leo Tolstoy, Jack London, Henry David Thoreau and Wallace Stegner that he noted down in his diary, these play an important role for any outsider trying to understand just who Chris was.
The book works wonders on different levels, it deals with non fiction in a dramatic storytelling way, like an adventure novel, but also stays as close as possible to the facts and truths recovered from Chris's diary. I didn't think his epic story could be condensed down to 200 pages, but it works, only concentrating on the things that truly matter. I was moved to the core. Not many books have had the opportunity to do this to me.
One shouldn’t judge a life by its end or its duration, but by its content. Chris may have died young, but his life certainly was a fulfilling one.
I always presumed Jon Krakauer's book would be some huge epic, but was surprised on finding out it's a little over 200 pages. I simply had to read it, just don't know why it took me so long.
It's going to be difficult to review this without making my own thoughts on Chris known first. Although it isn't as straightforward as this, taking everything into consideration, if there is to be a camp criticism and a camp McCandless, then I firmly sit with McCandless. He was an awe-inspiring bright young man, who simply broke free from the establishment to follow his own path, a path, going by both book and film that was simply stunning. I know there are people that criticized his adventure as reckless, stupid, dangerous and well unequipped for the treacherous landscape of wild Alaska, and were even angry with him, that he deserved what was coming to him, disrespecting nature. Let's not forget something, he probably died a slow agonizing death that you wouldn't wish on anybody, why the anger from people who didn't even know him? it was nobody else's business what Chris chose to undertake. As the old saying goes, it's a free country. And he was just that, free.
I do feel for his family of course, I can't begin to imagine the pain and anguish they would have had to injure, and the fact he didn't try to contact his sister Karine, who he was dearly close to, was strange. I just hope his family came to eventually realize that the two years Chris spent on the road he would have been immensely happy. That's got to count for something. Had he gone on to work, no doubt well paid work, you get the impression he just wouldn't want to be there. Had Chris been some wacko or mentally incapacitated person I would have taken far more pity over his story, but he wasn't, he was highly intelligent and knew exactly what he was doing. That's why, although he came to a sad end, I am still on the whole, happy for the guy.
The strongest parts of the book for me are actually not the last months in Alaska (which had to be recreated based on Chris’ diary and the evidence found at the site of his death), but the memories of people whom Chris had met on his travels, with whom he had caught rides, worked and stayed, struck up friendships. I was especially moved by the generosity of strangers and by Chris’s run in with 81 year old Ron Franz, whom he managed to convince to give up the monotonous life and take up adventure. These two years of traveling had no boundaries, no obligations, no limitations, no expectations. Just exploring the land, exploring life, and himself.
Jon Krakauer also included memories from his own youth, trying to draw comparisons with Chris, along with some other historical journey's similar to what McCandless embarked on.
Chris was a keen reader, and used literature as a way to inspire him on the road, there were quotes from the likes of Leo Tolstoy, Jack London, Henry David Thoreau and Wallace Stegner that he noted down in his diary, these play an important role for any outsider trying to understand just who Chris was.
The book works wonders on different levels, it deals with non fiction in a dramatic storytelling way, like an adventure novel, but also stays as close as possible to the facts and truths recovered from Chris's diary. I didn't think his epic story could be condensed down to 200 pages, but it works, only concentrating on the things that truly matter. I was moved to the core. Not many books have had the opportunity to do this to me.
One shouldn’t judge a life by its end or its duration, but by its content. Chris may have died young, but his life certainly was a fulfilling one.
December 27, 2025
Christopher Johnson McCandless began roaming in 1991 after graduating college.
"The very basic core of a man's living spirit is his passion for adventure."
He gave away his savings ($25,000) to charity, got rid of all his material possessions, burned his remaining money and just left.
He didn't tell anyone where he was going, what he was doing - just up and left, leaving a stunned sister and confused family behind.
"Don't settle down and sit in one place. Move around, be nomadic, make each day a new horizon."
Like his favorite heroes, he set off for an adventure. Eventually he left behind his car in the Mojave Desert and lived under an assumed name, Alexander Supertramp.
He kept his journals with him, he worked when hungry and slowly, but surely, made his way to the Alaskan wilderness.
"It's not always necessary to be strong, but to feel strong."
Along the way he met many a wonderful person - of which he touched their lives and even months later, they remembered and knew of him. But, what's shocking most of all is how he was found.
Alone. Emaciated. Dead.
His story has captured the hearts and minds of millions, he is gone but he will be remembered.
Whew.
"When you forgive, you love. And when you love, God’s light shines upon you."
There's a lot to unpack here.
I have never read this book, I have never seen the movie but I know his story.
I remember my mom telling me parts when I was a child, my teachers filling me in during history lessons and even friends talk about this unforgettable book.
So, when it became available at the library, I had to check it out.
And wow.
I really didn't know what to expect (and this certainly wasn't what I thought I was going to read) and yet, it was perfect.
This was told through a third party - someone who read about McCandless's story back when it was a minor blurb in a newspaper and was curious where it began.
So, the author picked up the thread and followed it - eventually reconstructing the year before McCandless's death and the reason behind him leaving everything behind.
This book was so well-written.
It completely encapsulated this young man's life and death. This is one of those books that once you finish it, you are spoiled for everything else for a long, long time.
YouTube | Blog | Instagram | Twitter | Facebook | Snapchat @miranda_reads
"Sometimes he tried too hard to make sense of the world, to figure out why people were bad to each other so often."
April 9, 2008
I love Jon Krakauer. I didn't find one single thing about the Alex McCandless even remotely interesting. He came across as a spoiled brat with no concept of reality - basically because of his priveleged upbringing. But somehow, he blamed his parents for that void of myopic self absorption.
I live in Alaska and I've lived in Idaho and Colorado and Oregon . . . basically AROUND people who love the great outdoors. I am more comfortable in a heated coffee shop READING about the great outdoors. Still, I know that heading into any forest - particularly one at that latitude and altitude in pursuit of adventure with (a) no food, (b) no gear, (c) no plan and (d) no backup plan is nothing short of delusional or maybe just stupid.
I absolutely adore Jon Krakauer's attempts to explain Alex's possible motives and angst. I get that Krakauer identifies with some of what gnawed at Alex . . . that discontent . . . that feeling that life can't possibly be this pointless . . . etc. I wonder about those things with fairly consistent frequency. I suppose I have my own means of stamping those feelings out (alternating burst of extreme carbohydrate consumption and running or spinning; work and volunteerism). Still, the fact that Alex died of exposure in an abandoned bus in Denali National Park is less poignant than poetic - justice, that is. Darwinism, if you want to be cruel.
(Cringe) That sounded really awful, didn't it? But Krakauer carefully paints a picture of a young man completely disillusioned with the life that his parents provided for him, the future they groomed him for. A life easier, better than theirs. He points to his parents' mistakes and flaws as lightening rods for Alex's rejection of them and his pursuit of deeper understanding.
What a luxury. One that we all pursue at some point in our lives and if we have any sense, grow out of. I was constantly irritated with Alex for hitching, homelessness, biting every hand that tried to feed him. His lonely, desperate death not at all surprising and not terribly sad, either . . . except for what it put his family through.
I had no interest in seeing the movie. I saw trailer images of a young man looking off into the wildnerness with depth and intensity and that is NOT the Alex McCandless I got to know in the book. If Sean Penn managed to paint a more enlightened image of Alex, then he deviated from the book quite a bit.
I live in Alaska and I've lived in Idaho and Colorado and Oregon . . . basically AROUND people who love the great outdoors. I am more comfortable in a heated coffee shop READING about the great outdoors. Still, I know that heading into any forest - particularly one at that latitude and altitude in pursuit of adventure with (a) no food, (b) no gear, (c) no plan and (d) no backup plan is nothing short of delusional or maybe just stupid.
I absolutely adore Jon Krakauer's attempts to explain Alex's possible motives and angst. I get that Krakauer identifies with some of what gnawed at Alex . . . that discontent . . . that feeling that life can't possibly be this pointless . . . etc. I wonder about those things with fairly consistent frequency. I suppose I have my own means of stamping those feelings out (alternating burst of extreme carbohydrate consumption and running or spinning; work and volunteerism). Still, the fact that Alex died of exposure in an abandoned bus in Denali National Park is less poignant than poetic - justice, that is. Darwinism, if you want to be cruel.
(Cringe) That sounded really awful, didn't it? But Krakauer carefully paints a picture of a young man completely disillusioned with the life that his parents provided for him, the future they groomed him for. A life easier, better than theirs. He points to his parents' mistakes and flaws as lightening rods for Alex's rejection of them and his pursuit of deeper understanding.
What a luxury. One that we all pursue at some point in our lives and if we have any sense, grow out of. I was constantly irritated with Alex for hitching, homelessness, biting every hand that tried to feed him. His lonely, desperate death not at all surprising and not terribly sad, either . . . except for what it put his family through.
I had no interest in seeing the movie. I saw trailer images of a young man looking off into the wildnerness with depth and intensity and that is NOT the Alex McCandless I got to know in the book. If Sean Penn managed to paint a more enlightened image of Alex, then he deviated from the book quite a bit.
May 6, 2015
We are all heroes to ourselves. McCandless was, Krakauer is. This doesn't vary. All that varies is how we define heroism and how much, or how little, we are prepared to do to for that stance.
In order to get people, usually young men, to sacrifice their lives we tell them of those that went before and tell them they were heroes who died for their countries, died for their principles, died even for their dreams. Impractical dreams that are the province of the young. And those who would be heroes never concern themselves with the practical, that is far too mundane, it is for others to take care of those details.
McCandless' dream of heroism was to survive entirely alone and entirely off the land at the ends of the earth. It didn't include the practicality of learning about the wild foods he might forage in that area, or how he might survive in extreme weather conditions, or even exactly where his place of solitude was situated so that when he sought succour at the end, he didn't even know how close it really was.
The final photograph he took of himself is of a wasted face, gaunt but beautiful with the shining eyes of one who has lived his dream and is satisfied. Then he died.
In order to get people, usually young men, to sacrifice their lives we tell them of those that went before and tell them they were heroes who died for their countries, died for their principles, died even for their dreams. Impractical dreams that are the province of the young. And those who would be heroes never concern themselves with the practical, that is far too mundane, it is for others to take care of those details.
McCandless' dream of heroism was to survive entirely alone and entirely off the land at the ends of the earth. It didn't include the practicality of learning about the wild foods he might forage in that area, or how he might survive in extreme weather conditions, or even exactly where his place of solitude was situated so that when he sought succour at the end, he didn't even know how close it really was.
The final photograph he took of himself is of a wasted face, gaunt but beautiful with the shining eyes of one who has lived his dream and is satisfied. Then he died.
November 26, 2025
I certainly identified with McCandless in my formative ‘wilder’ years—if you’ll pardon—in that I romanticized a way of life unencumbered by concern for consequences. Not that I would have phrased it so back then. Krakauer reverently details a spirit of freedom and druthers at the expense of adventurous acumen. Wandering quixotically into the wilderness with reliance on ancestral instinct naively neglects that many of those ancestors—with more keenly honed instincts—died prematurely under similar circumstances still. There is no better way to assure one’s oneness with nature than to permanently become one of its numerous inanimate boneyard denizens. Respect, admiration, pity, judgment. None of the discourse surrounding this young man’s solitary quest amounts to much. I cannot glamorize, idealize, nor castigate. It is. There are things at once serene and obscene to be gleaned.
August 17, 2025
Imagine. The last you hear from one of your children is a hastily written letter as they embark on an odyssey across North America, destination Alaska. Later to be found dead (not a spoiler). This young man’s death in 1992, has been a topic of discussion, examination, and derision ever since.
Christopher McCandless was certainly a young man who marched to a different beat, some thought him strange. He was bright, and personable enough – at times. But he became obsessed about certain things – no different to many other young people we know. In fact, author – John Krakauer – no slouch himself when it comes to adventure, seems to be at pains to make the point. That Chris, although not adverse to risk – was no fool. He was a little unlucky. Yep – just a tad unlucky.
This man certainly had a chromic case of wanderlust (oh man, I can understand that), and he acted it out. He would give away all his money, before embarking on one of his journey’s and live rough, sleep with the homeless, forage the land for things to eat, take jobs, then leave at a moment’s notice. Wow – imagine.
Anyway, his goal was to eventually trek/hitchhike to Alaska. He wandered off into the wild, totally underprepared (according to witnesses) for surviving in such conditions.
Survive he did, until he didn’t.
He was later found in an abandoned bus on a desolate trail. The author, through witness accounts, friends and family of Chris, correspondence and Chris’s own diary notes presents a case on how he believes Chris finally succumbed to the elements. Towards the end of this book, the author presents his evidence as if a lawyer prosecuting a case. Weaving the threads of evidence together to make a compelling case.
These people (adventurers), seem to be cut from a different cloth to the rest of us. They seem to thrive on deprivation, fear, adrenaline. Pushing things to the very limit and then more. One can only admire them – preferably, from the comfort of an armchair.
Local inhabitants help him portage around a barrier……..Alex finds Mexicans to be warm, friendly people. Much more hospital than Americans…..
Please note, I do have an issue with this observation. That is, Mexicans are Americans too!
From someone who’s version of adventuring is to put on an extra layer of Vegemite on his morning toast, or even have two showers in one day – this amazing story, and the people in it, enthralled me. One of the greatest joys about reading is learning about people nothing like oneself.
This did that.
4 Stars (almost 5)
Christopher McCandless was certainly a young man who marched to a different beat, some thought him strange. He was bright, and personable enough – at times. But he became obsessed about certain things – no different to many other young people we know. In fact, author – John Krakauer – no slouch himself when it comes to adventure, seems to be at pains to make the point. That Chris, although not adverse to risk – was no fool. He was a little unlucky. Yep – just a tad unlucky.
This man certainly had a chromic case of wanderlust (oh man, I can understand that), and he acted it out. He would give away all his money, before embarking on one of his journey’s and live rough, sleep with the homeless, forage the land for things to eat, take jobs, then leave at a moment’s notice. Wow – imagine.
Anyway, his goal was to eventually trek/hitchhike to Alaska. He wandered off into the wild, totally underprepared (according to witnesses) for surviving in such conditions.
Survive he did, until he didn’t.
He was later found in an abandoned bus on a desolate trail. The author, through witness accounts, friends and family of Chris, correspondence and Chris’s own diary notes presents a case on how he believes Chris finally succumbed to the elements. Towards the end of this book, the author presents his evidence as if a lawyer prosecuting a case. Weaving the threads of evidence together to make a compelling case.
These people (adventurers), seem to be cut from a different cloth to the rest of us. They seem to thrive on deprivation, fear, adrenaline. Pushing things to the very limit and then more. One can only admire them – preferably, from the comfort of an armchair.
Local inhabitants help him portage around a barrier……..Alex finds Mexicans to be warm, friendly people. Much more hospital than Americans…..
Please note, I do have an issue with this observation. That is, Mexicans are Americans too!
From someone who’s version of adventuring is to put on an extra layer of Vegemite on his morning toast, or even have two showers in one day – this amazing story, and the people in it, enthralled me. One of the greatest joys about reading is learning about people nothing like oneself.
This did that.
4 Stars (almost 5)
April 19, 2018
This book got me riveted in the tragic story of Chris McCandless, a young man who left his family and friends, abandoned most of his material possessions, went to the Alaska wilderness and perished there. The author does a great job of portraying McCandless complex personality through meticulous research based on interviews, letters and journal entries. The writing is so engaging that although it is already clear from the beginning how McCandless' story would end, I was hooked till the last page. Krakauer only digresses when discussing his own high-risk undertaking and those of ill-fated adventurers similar to McCandless — these parts offer comparison to McCandless' character but I found myself getting impatient and wanting them to end quickly, to return to the main story itself which is much more compelling.
Readers have been divided with regard to this story. Some admire McCandless' daring and idealism; some others say he was stupid, reckless and arrogant enough to have gone to Alaska without sufficient preparation. I think he was a human being with faults and merits, but I have to admit I felt something stirring in me when I read this passage, taken from a letter he wrote to a friend:
"...make a radical change in your lifestyle and begin to boldly do things which you may previously never have thought of doing, or been too hesitant to attempt. So many people live within unhappy circumstances and yet will not take the initiative to change their situation because they are conditioned to a life of security, conformity, and conservation... The very basic core of a man's living spirit is his passion for adventure."
The passage resonates with me because my life has been filled with stagnation and inactivity. I am the queen of conventionalism. I don't consider myself unhappy, but I'm always afraid of moving outside the comfort zone, of expanding further than my own comfortable little shell. I often don't exert myself to my best capabilities because halfhearted efforts seemed good enough. When I read about McCandless, I noticed that one of his admirable traits is if he wanted something he went out and did it. He was not afraid of challenges, the greater they are the better. Jason Mraz says "live high, live mighty, live righteously". I think that was what McCandless did: he lived up to his ideals.
One the other hand, the greatest tragedy of McCandless' life, in my opinion, was his conflicting feelings toward human intimacy and relationship. He clashed with his parents and others who didn't share his beliefs to the point that he spurned humanity and sought nature and the wilderness instead. But even during his solitary journeys he met a lot of people and connected with them, touching their lives as well as his own. His final odyssey in Alaska had probably made him realize, more than ever, the raw need for companionship, but he didn't survive that trip — causing endless grief to his family. So in the end, if there is something I can take from McCandless story, it is this message: Be bold. Get out there. Do something. But don't forget those who love you.
Readers have been divided with regard to this story. Some admire McCandless' daring and idealism; some others say he was stupid, reckless and arrogant enough to have gone to Alaska without sufficient preparation. I think he was a human being with faults and merits, but I have to admit I felt something stirring in me when I read this passage, taken from a letter he wrote to a friend:
"...make a radical change in your lifestyle and begin to boldly do things which you may previously never have thought of doing, or been too hesitant to attempt. So many people live within unhappy circumstances and yet will not take the initiative to change their situation because they are conditioned to a life of security, conformity, and conservation... The very basic core of a man's living spirit is his passion for adventure."
The passage resonates with me because my life has been filled with stagnation and inactivity. I am the queen of conventionalism. I don't consider myself unhappy, but I'm always afraid of moving outside the comfort zone, of expanding further than my own comfortable little shell. I often don't exert myself to my best capabilities because halfhearted efforts seemed good enough. When I read about McCandless, I noticed that one of his admirable traits is if he wanted something he went out and did it. He was not afraid of challenges, the greater they are the better. Jason Mraz says "live high, live mighty, live righteously". I think that was what McCandless did: he lived up to his ideals.
One the other hand, the greatest tragedy of McCandless' life, in my opinion, was his conflicting feelings toward human intimacy and relationship. He clashed with his parents and others who didn't share his beliefs to the point that he spurned humanity and sought nature and the wilderness instead. But even during his solitary journeys he met a lot of people and connected with them, touching their lives as well as his own. His final odyssey in Alaska had probably made him realize, more than ever, the raw need for companionship, but he didn't survive that trip — causing endless grief to his family. So in the end, if there is something I can take from McCandless story, it is this message: Be bold. Get out there. Do something. But don't forget those who love you.
February 7, 2017
This book seems to divide people. One group seems to think McCandless was a visionary; a free-thinking, wild spirit who lived his dream and died an unfortunate, tragic death. The other group thinks he was a stupid kid; an ill-prepared daydreamer who brought his demise upon himself due to his own idiocy.
I think it's entirely possible he was both. In my experience, the two states are not mutually exclusive. The one thing that's clearly true is that his death was avoidable and tragic. Whichever camp you fall into, this is an upsetting tale.
What also upsets me is that, due to the media picking up on this case, with various newspaper and magazine articles being written about it, a movie being made and (the surefire win for anyone looking to be a teenage martyr) a soundtrack album being recorded by hipster messiah Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam, McCandless is being promoted as an inspirational figure for impressionable young people.
I can only hope that they will take this sad tale onboard as a cautionary tale, rather than one to emulate.
I think it's entirely possible he was both. In my experience, the two states are not mutually exclusive. The one thing that's clearly true is that his death was avoidable and tragic. Whichever camp you fall into, this is an upsetting tale.
What also upsets me is that, due to the media picking up on this case, with various newspaper and magazine articles being written about it, a movie being made and (the surefire win for anyone looking to be a teenage martyr) a soundtrack album being recorded by hipster messiah Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam, McCandless is being promoted as an inspirational figure for impressionable young people.
I can only hope that they will take this sad tale onboard as a cautionary tale, rather than one to emulate.
July 16, 2017
What a dumbass.
March 6, 2016
Not marking my spoilers as I believe most people know the basic story. If you don't, proceed with caution!
I liked this book okay - it is probably my least favorite Krakauer book, but I think that was because my feelings about it were tainted by the main character. McCandless was soooooo frustrating. He went about the free spirit/return to the wild thing all wrong. He refused help and destroyed his resources with the belief that that was what was required to survive on your own. No! Be prepared! Learn basic skills! Accept free help! All of those things would have still allowed him to be a vagabond and he might still be alive today.
Also frustrating is the fact that I hear some people idolizing McCandless. They want to be like him, they think he approached getting away from it all in a wise fashion, they martyr him (maybe not realizing that it was his own ineptitude that caused his death??).
Please read this as a cautionary tale, not as a guidebook for escaping life and responsibilities. If you do, I am sorry to say, you may meet the same fate.
I liked this book okay - it is probably my least favorite Krakauer book, but I think that was because my feelings about it were tainted by the main character. McCandless was soooooo frustrating. He went about the free spirit/return to the wild thing all wrong. He refused help and destroyed his resources with the belief that that was what was required to survive on your own. No! Be prepared! Learn basic skills! Accept free help! All of those things would have still allowed him to be a vagabond and he might still be alive today.
Also frustrating is the fact that I hear some people idolizing McCandless. They want to be like him, they think he approached getting away from it all in a wise fashion, they martyr him (maybe not realizing that it was his own ineptitude that caused his death??).
Please read this as a cautionary tale, not as a guidebook for escaping life and responsibilities. If you do, I am sorry to say, you may meet the same fate.
May 30, 2020
84th book of 2020.
S.O.S. I NEED YOUR HELP. I AM INJURED, NEAR DEATH, AND TOO WEAK TO HIKE OUT OF HERE. I AM ALL ALONE, THIS IS NO JOKE. IN THE NAME OF GOD, PLEASE REMAIN TO SAVE ME. I AM OUT COLLECTING BERRIES CLOSE BY AND SHALL RETURN THIS EVENING. THANK YOU, CHRIS MCCANDLESS. AUGUST?
I’m unsure how to start this review; for the first time in a while, I’m finding it difficult to access my thoughts on this. I’ve got so much to say, but even after waiting a whole day, my thoughts are all scrambled in the wind. I’ll start with this. At 2am the other night I tapped the touch-lamp on my bedside table and opened my copy of Into the Wild – in pencil, I scrawled, “Literature Failed the Heroes in this Book.” It is pictured below. I then turned out my light, rolled over, and went to sleep.
I was born in 1997 – five years after Chris McCandless died. The note I used to start the review was found on the bus his body was in. He weighed about four stone. Jon Krakauer wrote an article about the 24 year old boy who died in Alaska, but his obsession held him longer, long enough to write this beautiful, horrible book. I am glad that he did. This book transcends being about McCandless.
One does not look have to look far to find people laughing at McCandless, calling him an idiot, or worst of all – “He deserved to die.” Ironically, comments like these, which have been wrenching my heart, came out my own brother’s mouth. Though my brother is one to speak rashly, and flippantly about things, he said to me over the dinner table, after I explained the book rather briefly, that it sounded like McCandless was an “idiot”. We are very unalike. My brother sees the world in black and white. He believes something or he doesn’t, there are no grey areas in his life. It was at the dinner table this happened, and when I opened my mouth, clearly some sort of fury or defiance in my eyes, my mother gave me the don’t eyes, the drop-it eyes. Chances are my brother said it only to get a rise out of me, though I think he partly believed what he was saying. McCandless, as far as he was aware, as far as many people are aware, went into Alaska with almost no equipment, no food, and little idea on what he was going to do. He survived 114 days.
Literature is Dangerous
I’ve been unpacking my little late-night scrawl. I awoke in the morning thinking, “Why the hell did I write that? What does that even mean?” I put it down to trying to be clever, 2am delusions. But, I’ve thought about it, and I now stand by my past, tired self. I do not mean that literature is to blame for McCandless’ death, or any of the other people in the book that Krakauer tells us about. What I mean to say, I think, is that they were failed by literature. Literature is dangerous. Book burnings show how intimidating books can be. Rushdie’s six-million pound bounty for writing The Satanic Verses is a modern day testament to the power of books, and the consequences of writing. It’s interesting to think that just about anyone, the most malleable of teenagers, can read books by mad philosophers, to take fiction literally. McCandless loved Jack London, Tolstoy, Thoreau. Krakauer takes us on a jaunt in his own life, when, a year younger than McCandless was in Alaska, he nearly lost his life climbing the Devils Thumb. He admitted to be on a high from reading too much Nietzsche and Kerouac – as if these were factors of his journey. They were. They were for McCandless too. Each chapter of this book starts with a quote, many of which are highlighted quotes from the paperbacks found with McCandless’ body, and many of them mirror the existence the young man was striving for. So, in way, literature inspired McCandless, Krakauer too, into searching for more meaning in life, for something bigger than themselves. To quote Kerouac, “Because in the end, you won’t remember the time you spent working in the office or mowing your lawn. Climb that goddamn mountain.” If that doesn’t make your heart swell with possibility, with ideas of escape, or living in fresh air and leaving behind this mundane 21st century life, then I don’t know what will. And if doesn’t, maybe that’s proof that terrifyingly, if I were less safe and secure in my home, if I lived in America, I could have been a McCandless, or a Krakauer, depending how lucky I was.
I’ve read a lot of Kerouac. I’m getting interested in spirituality, Buddhism, the soul, the nature world. Things that seem to steer me towards the life that the men in this book began striving for. Krakauer is impartial, though you can sense some to some degree a biased opinion, he is mostly removed from the book, leaving it entirely up to the reader to decide for themselves. He includes some of the comments he had, the negative, attacking ones. There are also arguments on my side of the fence: It is hardly unusual for a young man to be drawn to a pursuit considered reckless by his elders; engaging in risky behaviour is a rite of passage in our culture no less than in most others. Danger has always held a certain allure. That, in large part, is why so many teenagers drive too fast and drink too much and take too many drugs, why it has always been so easy for nations to recruit young men to go to war: It can be argued that youthful derring-do is in fact evolutionary adaptive, a behaviour merely encoded in our genes. McCandless knew the risks, and Krakauer allows that he was arrogant too, he was unprepared, yes. His failings do not, cannot, outlive what McCandless was trying to do. A 24 year old man does not die to be remembered for his failings. At least, his words will be remembered.
It is the experiences, the memories, the great triumphant joy of living to the fullest extent in which real meaning is found. God it’s great to be alive! Thank you. Thank you.
Heroes in this Book
This book moved me so much is because of the parallels I have found, possibly projected, in McCandless. I am currently 23, just a year younger than he was. I have a love of literature, some say “obsessive” love, for literature. I am into the outdoors, I have been to many countries, I was in the scouts for most of my childhood, I adore camping and walking… I love the things that McCandless loves. And above all, I can imagine, as I have suggested, if I was less invested in my life here, I can picture myself doing something similar. Maybe not Alaska, and maybe not without supplies, or a map, but certainly walking out with grand (maybe naïve) ideas of transcendence found in the wilderness. Krakauer makes an important distinction: McCandless didn’t want to die, that much is clear from the S.O.S note. In the end, he must have known he was dying, which does pain me a little to admit that he was in that bus, dying, and he knew it. I won’t reveal all the heart-breaking notebook entries, but there are some which show that despite his situation, McCandless was happy. He had escaped civilisation; he was living a truer life than his hero, Jack London, even more than Tolstoy. They were hypocrites where McCandless wasn’t. He lived the life he wanted to live, he lived the life he chose to live. I couldn’t count the amount of people I know that I believe live lives of unfulfilled yearning. It is the most common thing in today’s society – with social media we constantly see lives that we think would be better, lives that we imagine for ourselves. Oh, to be more attractive. Oh, to be more famous. Oh, to be richer. We strive for lives that we can’t achieve, or else lives that we can’t be bothered to try and achieve. McCandless died with complete fulfilment in the life he wanted. He carved through the bullshit of life and reached the epicentre of his yearnings. His yearning was the death of him. But I dare say that he died having fulfilled himself, more than most of the people I know in my own life. Possibly, more than I will ever be able to fulfil my own life.
That is why I call the people in this book “Heroes.” The photo in this review is one of McCandless' final acts - one hand holding his final note toward the camera lens, the other raised in a brave, beatific farewell. Krakauer goes on to say this, of the photograph: But if he pitied himself in those last difficult hours- because he was so young, because he was alone, because his body had betrayed him and his will had let him down- it's not apparent from the photograph. He is smiling in the picture, and there is no mistaking the look in his eyes: Chris McCandless was at peace, serene as a monk gone to God. Or as McCandless once wrote of himself in the third person, But his spirit is soaring.
S.O.S. I NEED YOUR HELP. I AM INJURED, NEAR DEATH, AND TOO WEAK TO HIKE OUT OF HERE. I AM ALL ALONE, THIS IS NO JOKE. IN THE NAME OF GOD, PLEASE REMAIN TO SAVE ME. I AM OUT COLLECTING BERRIES CLOSE BY AND SHALL RETURN THIS EVENING. THANK YOU, CHRIS MCCANDLESS. AUGUST?
I’m unsure how to start this review; for the first time in a while, I’m finding it difficult to access my thoughts on this. I’ve got so much to say, but even after waiting a whole day, my thoughts are all scrambled in the wind. I’ll start with this. At 2am the other night I tapped the touch-lamp on my bedside table and opened my copy of Into the Wild – in pencil, I scrawled, “Literature Failed the Heroes in this Book.” It is pictured below. I then turned out my light, rolled over, and went to sleep.
I was born in 1997 – five years after Chris McCandless died. The note I used to start the review was found on the bus his body was in. He weighed about four stone. Jon Krakauer wrote an article about the 24 year old boy who died in Alaska, but his obsession held him longer, long enough to write this beautiful, horrible book. I am glad that he did. This book transcends being about McCandless.
One does not look have to look far to find people laughing at McCandless, calling him an idiot, or worst of all – “He deserved to die.” Ironically, comments like these, which have been wrenching my heart, came out my own brother’s mouth. Though my brother is one to speak rashly, and flippantly about things, he said to me over the dinner table, after I explained the book rather briefly, that it sounded like McCandless was an “idiot”. We are very unalike. My brother sees the world in black and white. He believes something or he doesn’t, there are no grey areas in his life. It was at the dinner table this happened, and when I opened my mouth, clearly some sort of fury or defiance in my eyes, my mother gave me the don’t eyes, the drop-it eyes. Chances are my brother said it only to get a rise out of me, though I think he partly believed what he was saying. McCandless, as far as he was aware, as far as many people are aware, went into Alaska with almost no equipment, no food, and little idea on what he was going to do. He survived 114 days.
Literature is Dangerous
I’ve been unpacking my little late-night scrawl. I awoke in the morning thinking, “Why the hell did I write that? What does that even mean?” I put it down to trying to be clever, 2am delusions. But, I’ve thought about it, and I now stand by my past, tired self. I do not mean that literature is to blame for McCandless’ death, or any of the other people in the book that Krakauer tells us about. What I mean to say, I think, is that they were failed by literature. Literature is dangerous. Book burnings show how intimidating books can be. Rushdie’s six-million pound bounty for writing The Satanic Verses is a modern day testament to the power of books, and the consequences of writing. It’s interesting to think that just about anyone, the most malleable of teenagers, can read books by mad philosophers, to take fiction literally. McCandless loved Jack London, Tolstoy, Thoreau. Krakauer takes us on a jaunt in his own life, when, a year younger than McCandless was in Alaska, he nearly lost his life climbing the Devils Thumb. He admitted to be on a high from reading too much Nietzsche and Kerouac – as if these were factors of his journey. They were. They were for McCandless too. Each chapter of this book starts with a quote, many of which are highlighted quotes from the paperbacks found with McCandless’ body, and many of them mirror the existence the young man was striving for. So, in way, literature inspired McCandless, Krakauer too, into searching for more meaning in life, for something bigger than themselves. To quote Kerouac, “Because in the end, you won’t remember the time you spent working in the office or mowing your lawn. Climb that goddamn mountain.” If that doesn’t make your heart swell with possibility, with ideas of escape, or living in fresh air and leaving behind this mundane 21st century life, then I don’t know what will. And if doesn’t, maybe that’s proof that terrifyingly, if I were less safe and secure in my home, if I lived in America, I could have been a McCandless, or a Krakauer, depending how lucky I was.
I’ve read a lot of Kerouac. I’m getting interested in spirituality, Buddhism, the soul, the nature world. Things that seem to steer me towards the life that the men in this book began striving for. Krakauer is impartial, though you can sense some to some degree a biased opinion, he is mostly removed from the book, leaving it entirely up to the reader to decide for themselves. He includes some of the comments he had, the negative, attacking ones. There are also arguments on my side of the fence: It is hardly unusual for a young man to be drawn to a pursuit considered reckless by his elders; engaging in risky behaviour is a rite of passage in our culture no less than in most others. Danger has always held a certain allure. That, in large part, is why so many teenagers drive too fast and drink too much and take too many drugs, why it has always been so easy for nations to recruit young men to go to war: It can be argued that youthful derring-do is in fact evolutionary adaptive, a behaviour merely encoded in our genes. McCandless knew the risks, and Krakauer allows that he was arrogant too, he was unprepared, yes. His failings do not, cannot, outlive what McCandless was trying to do. A 24 year old man does not die to be remembered for his failings. At least, his words will be remembered.
It is the experiences, the memories, the great triumphant joy of living to the fullest extent in which real meaning is found. God it’s great to be alive! Thank you. Thank you.
Heroes in this Book
This book moved me so much is because of the parallels I have found, possibly projected, in McCandless. I am currently 23, just a year younger than he was. I have a love of literature, some say “obsessive” love, for literature. I am into the outdoors, I have been to many countries, I was in the scouts for most of my childhood, I adore camping and walking… I love the things that McCandless loves. And above all, I can imagine, as I have suggested, if I was less invested in my life here, I can picture myself doing something similar. Maybe not Alaska, and maybe not without supplies, or a map, but certainly walking out with grand (maybe naïve) ideas of transcendence found in the wilderness. Krakauer makes an important distinction: McCandless didn’t want to die, that much is clear from the S.O.S note. In the end, he must have known he was dying, which does pain me a little to admit that he was in that bus, dying, and he knew it. I won’t reveal all the heart-breaking notebook entries, but there are some which show that despite his situation, McCandless was happy. He had escaped civilisation; he was living a truer life than his hero, Jack London, even more than Tolstoy. They were hypocrites where McCandless wasn’t. He lived the life he wanted to live, he lived the life he chose to live. I couldn’t count the amount of people I know that I believe live lives of unfulfilled yearning. It is the most common thing in today’s society – with social media we constantly see lives that we think would be better, lives that we imagine for ourselves. Oh, to be more attractive. Oh, to be more famous. Oh, to be richer. We strive for lives that we can’t achieve, or else lives that we can’t be bothered to try and achieve. McCandless died with complete fulfilment in the life he wanted. He carved through the bullshit of life and reached the epicentre of his yearnings. His yearning was the death of him. But I dare say that he died having fulfilled himself, more than most of the people I know in my own life. Possibly, more than I will ever be able to fulfil my own life.
That is why I call the people in this book “Heroes.” The photo in this review is one of McCandless' final acts - one hand holding his final note toward the camera lens, the other raised in a brave, beatific farewell. Krakauer goes on to say this, of the photograph: But if he pitied himself in those last difficult hours- because he was so young, because he was alone, because his body had betrayed him and his will had let him down- it's not apparent from the photograph. He is smiling in the picture, and there is no mistaking the look in his eyes: Chris McCandless was at peace, serene as a monk gone to God. Or as McCandless once wrote of himself in the third person, But his spirit is soaring.
January 27, 2016
I don't know why everyone went so wild over this book or this kid - is there one without the other? It seems like people only cared because it was a Jon Krakauer book that translated well to Hollywood. The guy in the book didn't even have enough material about himself to make a whole book and every other chapter is about some other person who did a similar "disappearance into nature." Dying because you don't know how to take care of yourself in the wild is no reason for society to glorify your life.
October 15, 2020
প্রকৃতির খুব কাছাকাছি থাকলে কেমন ফিল হতো তা বই পড়েই পেয়ে গেছি।
বই পড়ার পর মুভিটিও দেখে ফেলেছি চমৎকার একটি মুভি আপনারা যারা দেখেননি দেখে ফেলতে পারেন।
বই পড়লে বেশি ফিল পাবেন তবে মুভিটাও অনেক ভালো করেছে।
বই পড়ার পর মুভিটিও দেখে ফেলেছি চমৎকার একটি মুভি আপনারা যারা দেখেননি দেখে ফেলতে পারেন।
বই পড়লে বেশি ফিল পাবেন তবে মুভিটাও অনেক ভালো করেছে।
October 12, 2017
On the outside looking in, this seems like another case of arrogant human vs unassuming nature. Nature usually wins that fight. It did here and in a most tragic way. And yet, in Into the Wild Jon Krakauer does an excellent job of muddying up the waters, so that they flow with the natural fluidity of life itself. Was this kid so very unprepared? Was this a foolhardy and unnecessary death easily avoided with a few, slight precautions? Life is seldom black and white, cut and dry. Krakauer reminds us of that, while telling a riveting story.
March 8, 2021
So this idiot disdains material comforts his parent's gave him. Wanders off aimlessly moochin off other people he meets along the way. When he runs out of people to give him food/shelter/help he dies. The end.
He's not an adventurer- adventurers study routes, calculate supplies, learn to be self sufficient. They call their worried families. This brat was selfish and irresponsible; a shiftless wanderer who thought it would be fun and easy. The generosity of human kind (ie hard working people with jobs) and the bounty of nature will sustain him. As if it’s all skipping through meadows, picking berries and waking up to sunshine. You know what else is natural? Ebola. Tsunamis. Grizzly bears.
It was a wasted self indulgent short life. He's no adventurer, he's a silly overconfident buffoon. He turns his back on everything material exactly because he had a privileged upbringing and never learned the value of sturdy shoes and warm coats and food to eat. He has no respect for what true poverty is, or what self reliance means, and he had to end up dead to learn it.
Yes, he followed his dream, like a 4 year old chasing a ball across the interstate. He got flattened by the bus that is nature.
Its REALLY annoying how far out of his way the author goes to insist on McCandless's greatness and intellect in the face of his glaring incompetence and lack of resourcefulness. An underachiever of mammoth proportion. Moral of the story? When 3 year olds loose their shit its a temper tantrum, and when 40+ y.o loose their shit its a mid life crisis- but if you do it in the middle- You're a tragic hero? NO.
He's not an adventurer- adventurers study routes, calculate supplies, learn to be self sufficient. They call their worried families. This brat was selfish and irresponsible; a shiftless wanderer who thought it would be fun and easy. The generosity of human kind (ie hard working people with jobs) and the bounty of nature will sustain him. As if it’s all skipping through meadows, picking berries and waking up to sunshine. You know what else is natural? Ebola. Tsunamis. Grizzly bears.
It was a wasted self indulgent short life. He's no adventurer, he's a silly overconfident buffoon. He turns his back on everything material exactly because he had a privileged upbringing and never learned the value of sturdy shoes and warm coats and food to eat. He has no respect for what true poverty is, or what self reliance means, and he had to end up dead to learn it.
Yes, he followed his dream, like a 4 year old chasing a ball across the interstate. He got flattened by the bus that is nature.
Its REALLY annoying how far out of his way the author goes to insist on McCandless's greatness and intellect in the face of his glaring incompetence and lack of resourcefulness. An underachiever of mammoth proportion. Moral of the story? When 3 year olds loose their shit its a temper tantrum, and when 40+ y.o loose their shit its a mid life crisis- but if you do it in the middle- You're a tragic hero? NO.
January 17, 2019
The article written by J. Krakauer was totally enlarged to make this, an obsessive journalistic account of an obsession. I am sure that the core of it is included in this 200 pg book somewhere (the anecdote: young incompetent kid dies out in the wilderness); it should be short and sweet, however it is exhaustively stretched out (obviously to capitalize on the popular story) to include stories of the own writer himself as a kid (conceited!) plus brief accounts by people who met the young mentally ill man. Also, there's a long (but interesting) section which includes tales of other intrepid nonconformist isolationists. Why couldn't this kid just learn his lesson on moderation? Had this dude been into heroin instead, the results would have been strikingly similar (minus, of course, the book).
January 14, 2021
Into the Wild was an interesting read, but I have been having trouble in putting a rating on it. I had heard vague aspects about Christopher McCandless in the past, and until now, I'd never actually read anything about his life, and his tragic end.
This book was extremely well written. It is thorough in regards to investigating as to why and how McCandless died, and even the events leading up to his death. I enjoyed the author's writing style, and if I'm honest, I was totally pulled in to this story.
We meet a handful of witnesses who knew McCandless on a personal level, and they make a valued contribution to his story. I really enjoyed this read, but I disagree that McCandless is indeed being hailed a hero for the time he spent in the wild. Yes, it is definitely horrendous the way in which he died, but, in my personal opinion, he came across as a selfish and conceited character, who held no care for the people that loved him, therefore, breaking his families hearts. His death could have been entirely avoided had he not been so hubristic and pompous. Also, I think that creating a film out of this was completely the wrong thing to do. What kind of message are we sending out to kids that are easily influenced? This story should be used as a stark warning, not a celebration. I'm glad I read this, and I liked Krakauer's style, despite not agreeing with the way this story was publicised.
This book was extremely well written. It is thorough in regards to investigating as to why and how McCandless died, and even the events leading up to his death. I enjoyed the author's writing style, and if I'm honest, I was totally pulled in to this story.
We meet a handful of witnesses who knew McCandless on a personal level, and they make a valued contribution to his story. I really enjoyed this read, but I disagree that McCandless is indeed being hailed a hero for the time he spent in the wild. Yes, it is definitely horrendous the way in which he died, but, in my personal opinion, he came across as a selfish and conceited character, who held no care for the people that loved him, therefore, breaking his families hearts. His death could have been entirely avoided had he not been so hubristic and pompous. Also, I think that creating a film out of this was completely the wrong thing to do. What kind of message are we sending out to kids that are easily influenced? This story should be used as a stark warning, not a celebration. I'm glad I read this, and I liked Krakauer's style, despite not agreeing with the way this story was publicised.
February 15, 2021
Another well-written book by Jon Krakauer, this was a fascinating, and often sad, glimpse into the spiral down of an idealistic young man, Christopher McCandless. Even when his decision-making didn't make sense, the reader still somehow identifies with the internal struggle this young man was going through, and his journey becomes theirs to take with him. It seems terrible to say I enjoyed this book, but I really did. If nothing else, it allowed me to identify with someone else's struggles, while seeing from a safe distance the fallacy in their thinking.
★★★★ ½
★★★★ ½
November 28, 2024
Very different from the movie but still very good.
4.5
4.5
July 4, 2025
Tudo, Tudo e Nada
Chris McCandless tinha Tudo - família, dinheiro a potes, e logo que concluísse os estudos, aguardava-o uma carreira promissora.
Chris McCandless tinha Tudo, sim!
Um Tudo que era um Nada dissimulado!
Dir-se-ia que esse famigerado Tudo pertencia a outro que não ele, a um falso Chris que sufocava e amordaçava o jovem aventureiro de gema - um amante de Desafios, Liberdade e Autenticidade!...
Só aniquilando, reduzindo a cinzas esse Chris forjado, é que o verdadeiro Chris poderia, finalmente, emergir!...
Por conseguinte, num impulso radical e selvagem, Chris larga tudo e todos rumando ao Alaska, essa terra inóspita que será a grandiosa parteira do seu Ser...
Chris era humano como nós e teremos certamente muitos defeitos a apontar-lhe. Não obstante, a incessante busca de si mesmo é um tocante ponto de inspiração.
Por muito longa que seja uma vida, se não nos colarmos aos nossos sonhos, será falsa - uma vida que vivemos como nossa, sem que todavia nos pertença!
Soterramos aquilo que somos!
Morremos sem nunca ter nascido!...
Chris McCandless tinha Tudo - família, dinheiro a potes, e logo que concluísse os estudos, aguardava-o uma carreira promissora.
Chris McCandless tinha Tudo, sim!
Um Tudo que era um Nada dissimulado!
Dir-se-ia que esse famigerado Tudo pertencia a outro que não ele, a um falso Chris que sufocava e amordaçava o jovem aventureiro de gema - um amante de Desafios, Liberdade e Autenticidade!...
Só aniquilando, reduzindo a cinzas esse Chris forjado, é que o verdadeiro Chris poderia, finalmente, emergir!...
Por conseguinte, num impulso radical e selvagem, Chris larga tudo e todos rumando ao Alaska, essa terra inóspita que será a grandiosa parteira do seu Ser...
Chris era humano como nós e teremos certamente muitos defeitos a apontar-lhe. Não obstante, a incessante busca de si mesmo é um tocante ponto de inspiração.
Por muito longa que seja uma vida, se não nos colarmos aos nossos sonhos, será falsa - uma vida que vivemos como nossa, sem que todavia nos pertença!
Soterramos aquilo que somos!
Morremos sem nunca ter nascido!...
May 9, 2018
3ish stars.
The movie adaptation is one of my all-time faves. Of course, while this book is an unnecessarily expanded version of what was originally an article written by Krakauer, the movie turns it into an epic, dramatized, stranger-than-fiction, based-on-a -true-story biopic of Christopher McCandless.
McCandless in the book is still an enigmatic, magnetic, fascinating man, but would I have felt the same if I hadn't already loved Emile Hirsch's portrayal of him? Would I have been affected as much by the touching, powerful relationships he shared with Jan Burres, and Ron Franz if I hadn't been picturing the incredible cinematic performances of Catherine Keener and Hal Holbrook in my mind?
McCandless's story is awe-inspiring regardless, but Krakauer stretches it far past the breaking point by including narratives of other, similarly ill-fated explorers (including his own experiences), among other frivolous details that I honestly could have done without.
One of the uncommon instances where the movie surpasses the book, but I'm not disappointed I read it. Makes me want to get out and go hiking or backpacking; my wife and I have a goal to visit each of the 59 U.S. National Parks (we've been to 10/59 so far, a long way to go). Or if nothing else, to watch the movie again. :)
Posted in Mr. Philip's Library
The movie adaptation is one of my all-time faves. Of course, while this book is an unnecessarily expanded version of what was originally an article written by Krakauer, the movie turns it into an epic, dramatized, stranger-than-fiction, based-on-a -true-story biopic of Christopher McCandless.
McCandless in the book is still an enigmatic, magnetic, fascinating man, but would I have felt the same if I hadn't already loved Emile Hirsch's portrayal of him? Would I have been affected as much by the touching, powerful relationships he shared with Jan Burres, and Ron Franz if I hadn't been picturing the incredible cinematic performances of Catherine Keener and Hal Holbrook in my mind?
McCandless's story is awe-inspiring regardless, but Krakauer stretches it far past the breaking point by including narratives of other, similarly ill-fated explorers (including his own experiences), among other frivolous details that I honestly could have done without.
One of the uncommon instances where the movie surpasses the book, but I'm not disappointed I read it. Makes me want to get out and go hiking or backpacking; my wife and I have a goal to visit each of the 59 U.S. National Parks (we've been to 10/59 so far, a long way to go). Or if nothing else, to watch the movie again. :)
Posted in Mr. Philip's Library
November 10, 2023
🏔️🌲 A young man hikes into the Alaskan wilderness to see if he can survive and live off the land. But his story soon becomes a tragedy. (Nonfiction.) It’s gut wrenching really.
[The author also wrote a book about an infamous climbing disaster that occurred on Everest entitled Into Thin Air.]
[The author also wrote a book about an infamous climbing disaster that occurred on Everest entitled Into Thin Air.]
January 7, 2020
Krakauer makes the basic facts of Christopher McCandless's trek into the Alaskan wilderness and his death nearly 4 months later clear from the outset. Even though I'd heard a lot about this case, that's just the beginning of the story. His motivations, especially since graduating college a year earlier, are what make this story interesting. As some of McCandless's ideas about living a new kind of life off the map come into focus, Krakauer continues to highlight the harsh realities McCandless chose to face. While what McCandless was trying to do might be appealing to some, Krakauer reminds readers that McCandless was ill-prepared for the dangers. Ultimately, of course, the new life he had fashioned was cut short by tragedy. 3.75 stars
September 16, 2019
I think a lot of the people who have formed negative opinions of this story are really missing the point. Most people rage on and on about what a terribly selfish, careless idiot Chris McCandless was, to which I say, duh. John Krakauer points out many, many times that Chris was "heedless" and "overconfident." I never once felt that Krakauer idolized him or tried to make him into a hero. He was fascinated by McCandless, sure, and he certainly seems to have seen a lot of himself in the young man, but by no means does he gush about what a fantastic person or brave adventurer McCandless was.
Chris McCandless is fascinating to me because, despite how frustratingly foolhardy and arrogant he may come across (who's to say really - none of us ever knew him), I am astounded by the number of people who fell head over heels for him in such a short period of time. Grown men and women! It seems impossible that his flaws outweighed his character. The people he met over the course of his travels genuinely seemed to love him, but Chris was just one of those strange individuals who don't really want to be loved.
I do hope his parents and sister were able to find peace with McCandless's death. It's very hard to keep giving away your love to someone who simply doesn't want it.
Chris McCandless is fascinating to me because, despite how frustratingly foolhardy and arrogant he may come across (who's to say really - none of us ever knew him), I am astounded by the number of people who fell head over heels for him in such a short period of time. Grown men and women! It seems impossible that his flaws outweighed his character. The people he met over the course of his travels genuinely seemed to love him, but Chris was just one of those strange individuals who don't really want to be loved.
I do hope his parents and sister were able to find peace with McCandless's death. It's very hard to keep giving away your love to someone who simply doesn't want it.
August 12, 2025
It's very hard to convey the true essence of a person, but kudos to Jon Krakauer as I came away with a very good sense of who Chris was as a person. I watched the movie too, and it was nice to see the locales, but I didn't get as strong of a sense of character and soul as I did with the book.
There's a part of all of us that can identify with this vagabond odyssey, even if we wouldn't have undertaken it in quite the same way.
A heartbreaking read as Chris was so close to his ideal; one hopes that he has found it in the Great Beyond.
There's a part of all of us that can identify with this vagabond odyssey, even if we wouldn't have undertaken it in quite the same way.
A heartbreaking read as Chris was so close to his ideal; one hopes that he has found it in the Great Beyond.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33,027 reviews