Led Chris Mccandless to This Thesis

A girlfriend, or even a close friend, might balk at living on rice and wandering in the wild for months.

Although Krakauer rejects McCandless' refusal of all aid as a form of suicide, it seems justifiable in interpreting McCandless' determination to push aside all attempts to make his journey safer as a kind of unconscious misanthropy, or hatred of humanity. Having people care about him would have meant that he would have to take more responsibility for his safety. The farther away he pushed people from him emotionally, the more risky his behavior could become. Much like alcoholics or drug abusers' self-defeating behaviors, McCandless' embrace of asceticism and risk could be interpreted as a way of keeping people emotionally and physically distant. Only a person with no social responsibilities can burn money, refuse to send regular letters and postcards, and take from the world only as much as he needs for a day. McCandless loved humanity in the abstract (hence the donation to Oxfam) but wanted minimal contact with individual humans.

On a personal note, how were you affected by reading McCandless' story? What insights did you gain into your "self"?

Despite his seemingly suicidal recklessness, I identified with McCandless. So much of modern life seems false. We spend so much time dealing with 'disembodied' aspects of the world, making virtual connections through the Internet or dealing with bureaucracies that are necessary to function in modern society. Figuring out what credit card to use, worrying about having a job that pays us enough money to afford to go to college, worrying about what other people will say regarding one's clothes and life choices, all feel profoundly false.However, there is a limit to how much one can opt out of certain aspects of society, unless one rejects society entirely.

Other people have done what McCandless tried to do, without being so reckless of life and limb. Thoreau's goal was to survive in the woods, not to die in the woods and reject all aid. McCandless obviously did not hate humanity, otherwise he would never have donated his life savings to Oxfam, but aspects of his behavior do seem cruel, to his own body and to the individuals who came to care about him. To deny the need for help does not seem to be 'primal' and 'elemental' given that human beings are fundamentally social animals.

I am more apt to want to create a better society than to deny society, although I think human beings today could benefit from spending more time in nature. It is frustrating to want to take a walk, and have your best friend prefer to watch television indoors on a nice day; it can be soul-sapping to contemplate working behind a desk for the rest of one's life for a salary. I do not think McCandless had the answer to the frustrations of modern civilization, although I do think he began to ask….....