I picked this book up just before leaving for our trip to California. Maybe it wasn't the best choice considering the book is a true story about a guy who dies in the wilderness of Alaska, and we were preparing to hike into the wilderness of Mount Shasta. Ok, not quite the same thing, but I found the book to be thought-provoking. Here's a brief summary from Publishers Weekly:After graduating from Emory University in Atlanta in 1992, top student and athlete Christopher McCandless abandoned his possessions, gave his entire $24,000 savings account to charity and hitchhiked to Alaska, where he went to live in the wilderness. Four months later, he turned up dead. His diary, letters and two notes found at a remote campsite tell of his desperate effort to survive, apparently stranded by an injury and slowly starving. They also reflect the posturing of a confused young man, raised in affluent Annandale, Va., who self-consciously adopted a Tolstoyan renunciation of wealth and return to nature.
The book traces McCandless's last year living as a vagabond out west. I'm curious what you thought about it if you read the book or saw the movie. Some people have praised McCandless for living his ideals, while others have criticized him for being reckless and irresponsible. I guess I can see it both ways. I understand the appeal of his lifestyle. The idea of hitchhiking around the American West without any baggage sounds romantic (although my dependence on modern amenities would ultimately be a deterrent). But, it seems that McCandless was at least a little misguided. Returning to nature sounds great until you realize how brutal nature can be. Let me know what you think.
5 comments:
I guess my feeling was that you can live your ideals without being an idiot about it. We have lots of people here who eschew materialism. I support that. But Chris was 1) crappy to his friends and family 2) did not do the appropriate research to ensure his survival and 3)wasted a lot of resources. Seems to me that money he burned could have been put to good use feeding a poor family in Africa. And you don't have to be materialistic to be prepared for survival -- how did he expect to live off a 10 lb bag of rice?
I just thought he was a really self-involved person with no respect for his environment or other people, and it ended up biting him in the ass. Plus, I thought he was a little touched in the head.
i have to say, i agree with -L- on every point. it was rather a pathetic story
I completely agree with everything you said. Chris made a bunch of bad choices without regard for anyone else. And he ended up hurting a lot more people than he helped.
I guess I can relate to his wanderlust and some of his ideals, but like you said, he could have handled it differently
Overall, I thought the the book was an interesting exploration of Chris. It seemed kind of like a coming of age story (that unfortunately ended badly).
Did you know he actually grew up not far from where I did? It made his reaction to the world even more interesting to me because I felt like we grew up in the same environment, kind of.
Hmmm, I didn't think of that. I'm glad you turned out so much better!
Post a Comment