Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think that is an excellent summation of Chris McCandless’s actions and motivations. He died partly because (like many young people) deep down he didn’t really believe that death could actually happen to HIM, partly because he didn’t know what he didn’t know and was too cocky to listen to advice from those who DID know, and (primarily) because as someone who’d grown up in suburbia and who’d had limited experience out in real nature he simply didn’t grasp how small the margin of error is when you’re out completely alone in true wilderness. It doesn’t take a big mistake to kill you. A simple sprained ankle can do it..
Agreed. Anyone venturing out into Alaskan wilderness by themselves is risking death, even if well prepared.
McCandless's circumstances allowed him to journal his decline and for his body to be discovered, which when you think about it is a very unusual situation. He could have died in so many other ways, with no trace or record ever found.
I know a professional hunting guide who sometimes goes out on his own. He says, "if I don't come back at designated time, don't send anyone for me- leave me for the wolves." He's always well prepared and fully understands the risks and consequences.
I think there are two kinds of people. People with a wanderlust, and people without.
It has nothing to do with whether or not a person has wanderlust. It has to do with whether or not a person understands the skills required to successfully accomplish a particular adventure, and is willing to learn those skills in advance if he or she doesn't already possess them. Wandering with knowledge and skills is a fine adventure. Wandering blindly gets people killed.
Want to impress me? Come back alive from your adventure. Any fool can go out into the wilds and die.
Agreed. Anyone venturing out into Alaskan wilderness by themselves is risking death, even if well prepared.
McCandless's circumstances allowed him to journal his decline and for his body to be discovered, which when you think about it is a very unusual situation. He could have died in so many other ways, with no trace or record ever found.
Would that he had! It would have made no difference to McCandless, but lot of other overly-romantic young souls would be alive today if he'd simply vanished without a trace.
Quote:
I know a professional hunting guide who sometimes goes out on his own. He says, "if I don't come back at designated time, don't send anyone for me- leave me for the wolves." He's always well prepared and fully understands the risks and consequences.
A book that serves as a great contrast to Into the Wild is The Last Season. It clearly shows how easy it is for even the most skilled outdoorsman to make a lethal mistake. The difference is that Randy Morgenson knew and fully understood the risks he was taking. Chris McCandless, on the other hand, did not, as his decision to go to that particular spot showed - he didn't know enough to know the way in wouldn't work as the way out, because he had no feel for how rivers fed by meltwater behave at different times of the year. He was no different that the folks who go into slot canyons during the monsoon season or camp in arroyos. Those are basic errors that people with experience in those particular outdoor environments simply don't make.
It's interesting that he did this, voluntarily, and seemed to have such disdain for those he was rescuing.
It's no different from the disdain ER docs often express towards drunken car crash victims. It's hard to feel sorry for people who are victims of unbelievable stupidity (rather than truly bad luck).
It's interesting that he did this, voluntarily, and seemed to have such disdain for those he was rescuing.
He and I both have a disdain for stupidity. There were times when he wondered why he was risking his neck for folks who seem to think it was all one big joke.
When someone goes into any type of rescue situation many times they are risking their own lives, and it can be annoying when the person you rescue turns around and says "wow, didn't think it was that deep". really Einstein, you come across a ranging river and you think you can simply walk across it??
And it's not just uber dangerous things, it's can be simple things like mother nature. In my area we have flash floods and no matter how many times on the news, on the weather EVERY where people are told not to try and drive through a flash flood. And yet every summer we get someone that either perishes or has to be rescued while clinging to a tree.
Seriously Clara, when does common sense start to kick in.
I do admire those who have an adventurous spirit, to wholly commit yourself to some thing is noteworthy. The people who train for decades to climb Mt. Everest, throwing in 10's of thousands of dollars not to mention a good portion of their lives is really admirable. to wake up and think you can do some thing like that just because you want to be cool is not.
This isn't the first time someone drowned trying to cross a swollen and fast moving Teklanika River to get to the bus. Didn't they pay attention to what the book and movie said about this river? July is too late, not even McCandless was reckless enough to try crossing the river in the summer.
What does "really travel in style" mean? Maybe spend all that money they made on a cruise? Because their health is no longer good enough to do anything else?
I have known people who got sick, and died a year before they were to retire. I know people right now who are 75 or 80 years old, and still working, because they can't afford to retire. And I doubt they would know how to do anything else anyway. Work is all they have ever done.
Which is more tragic? A young person who gets out of school, travels around the world, and dies at age 25 doing something they love, or someone who works their entire life to pay off a student loan, car loan, home loan, only to die a year before their retirement? I say the person who died a year before their retirement. At least the young person got to experience the world, before they died. Not just spending their entire life working.
You are posing a false dichotomy. There are not two choices, they are many other possibilities.
You left out the part in my quote that said "retire early and travel in style". What's this stuff about being too unhealthy to do anything other than cruise?
Re: the bolded in your post above: And I know tons of people who live nice middle class lives and retire in their late 50's and early 60's. Anecdotal evidence is just that. I retired at 51, my husband at 55. Sure we cruise, but we also go to the Caribbean and snorkel, scuba, tube on rivers through cave systems, zip line, etc. We often go to theme parks (season pass!) and ride roller coasters, we stay in beautiful hotels and casinos, or rent out apartments through VRBO. We take deep sea fishing charters, or swim with dolphins, rays and even sharks. We hike, camp, and we ride our dirt bikes. We play in pickleball tournaments, and have taken back country tours on ATV's, and swim in hot springs, etc. You have some weird idea that people stop working and are all sick and broken. I live in a community with literally thousands of older adults (50-85) and most are out there riding jet skis, golfing, playing pickleball and tennis, dancing and doing yoga, etc on a daily basis. I'm not saying this to brag about my retirement, but to say there are more than 2 choices, and you did ask what I meant by "really travel in style", so I was defining that for you.
And YES, I find it far more tragic that a young person threw away all that life has to offer through his own blissful ignorance. Right now in the US, 70% of people live to age 65, and 69% retire by age 66, so all this about dying before you are able to retire is just an exaggeration to support your false choice.
Last edited by TheShadow; 07-29-2019 at 10:41 AM..
When I said he was a hero, I didn't mean I idolized the guy. Just that his journey inspired me to travel.
I think a lot of people don't get how inspiration works. I'm an artist. I get inspired by all sorts of things. A color. A scent. The sound of someone's voice. Inspiration doesn't mean you think the thing that's inspiring you is flawless or that you want to mimic that thing. It doesn't even mean the thing is good. It has nothing to do with what's moral or right. It could come from anything and anywhere. I could be inspired by an evil person too. Inspiration just means something about the thing set off a chain of thoughts in my brain that led to me feeling passionate about doing or creating something. It happens all the time with a huge variety of people, places, things, and ideas.
In that case, I guess the story did inspire me. It inspired me to say that, IMNSHO, this was a very sad and unnecessary way to end a life that showed early promise.
I'm descended from people who gave up everything, got on a ship that was somewhat ill-equipped to handle the journey, came to an unknown territory with inhospitable winters, for the promise of freedom.
Congratulations. So are most of the rest of us, you know.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
