Thursday, September 23, 2021

Into the Wild

It's been a site of pilgrimage over the twenty-four years since Jon Krakauer's Into the Wild first told the story of Chris McCandless, a.k.a. Alexander Supertramp -- the abandoned Fairbanks City bus, #142, in the middle of a in a clearing a couple hundred feet off the legendary Stampede Trail in Alaska, a track first blazed by a miner to his claim back in the 1930s. It even appeared on Google Earth, where it was marked "Stampede Trail Magic Bus," a name which invokes another, more mobile bus, a.k.a. "Furthur," aboard which Ken Kesey, Wavy Gravy, and others of the Merry Pranksters embarked upon trips of another kind in the 1960's.

The Fairbanks bus had been towed (along with another now gone) to the site as temporary shelter for workers years before, and had been fitted with box-spring beds and a stove; when the work was done, the bus was -- like so many things in Alaska -- abandoned. Unfortunately, its popularity was also its downfall; Alaska state troopers in Fairbanks say that more than 75 percent of their yearly rescues have been in its vicinity, and in recent years several people have drowned attempting to cross the Teklanika River, which cuts across the route to the bus, including a woman who had just visited the bus with her newly wed husband. Finally, on June 18th 2020, the bus was airlifted off the the site by an Alaska National Guard helicopter to an undisclosed location; rumor is that it may eventually be on display at the Museum of the North in Fairbanks.

When McCandless's body was found there by moose hunters in September of 1992, his family had not known his whereabouts or even heard from him, for more than two years. A young man full of promise, an A-student with a degree from a top college, no student loans, and a $25,000 start up savings from his parents, he seemed like a young man who had it made. And yet, before he departed on his curious quest, he'd given all that money to charity, burned the cash in his wallet and (soon after) abandoned his car. Changing his name to Alexander Supertramp, he traveled by hitch-hiking, crashing on couches, and working -- apparently hard and well -- at a series of farm jobs. He made friends everywhere he went, and yet at the end, he didn't want anyone to go with him. Krakauer, a journalist for Outside Magazine, was hired to do a story, which he did (it appeared in 1993), but he was still unsatisfied. Tracking down more of McCandless's friends -- some of whom contacted him after seeing the article in the magazine, helped fill out the picture, while Alex's few leavings -- postcards to friends, notes scribbled in the margins of books, and such -- offered the bare outlines of a journey.

Into the Wild, the resulting book, was a huge bestseller, and in 2007 was adapted as a film by Sean Penn.  And yet, despite the book's immense popularity, readers have remained divided: for some, McCandless is a true hero, a voyager of the spirit whose restless trek symbolizes everything great about the human desire to explore the world -- while for others, including quite a few Alaskans, he's just one of the apparently endless stream of inexperienced, foolish, and just plain stupid people who head out into the wilderness without the knowledge, skills, or materials essential to surviving. The debate is not an entirely new one; as Krakauer observes, a similar argument has long raged over Arctic expeditions such as that of Sir John Franklin, which -- though sanctioned by the British Empire and provided with what was though the best equipment -- canned food, two enormous ships, flour, buscuit, and rum -- proved unable to survive in the harsh Arctic climate, even though, a few miles from the stranded ice-bound vessels, Inuit families were enjoying a rich meal of seal meat and muktuk, and bouncing healthy babies on their knees in their snug igloos.

So, as we begin our journey with Chris/Alex, what do we think? Try not to be polarized by the debate which pits McCandless as hero vs. idiot -- but give a read to this thoughtful essay by my friend, the Alaskan Journalist David James. Would you, if you could have, gone to visit the bus? What was it that drew so many to the place? And what now, that the bus is taken away -- what should be done with it? Don't hesitate to speak your mind -- Chris certainly didn't.

UPDATE: Here's a link to a documentary about Chris that includes interviews with his family members; you can also watch an older documentary from 2007 that retraces Chris's route.

17 comments:

  1. At the beginning of the novel, I became greatly confused regarding how the story was formatted, because it seemed to be in the present day, but then it began jumping around from present day to the past without any acknowledgment. This took some getting used to because I had to decipher the timelines using the dates and years. Also, I began to question who was telling this story because it appeared to be like an interview or documentary of the death of Chris/Alex McCandless, but also giving real emotions from the past. I thought at first it was a family member or a friend, but then it became clear that it was a newspaper journalist doing research on the journey of Chris/Alex up to and following his death. The writer also had the assist of his diary and photo collection which I’m sure was helpful.

    Once I got past the formatting of the novel, I was able to move on to the entire story plot and as I examined my notes I began to question the mental state of Chris/Alex. I know that the author does not believe Chris/Alex is mentally ill as stated on page 85; however, I think otherwise. My inquiry began when the author mentioned multiple times his negativity towards the American capitalistic society and almost expressed feelings of hatred for the American public. For example, Ron Franz mentioned that frequently “…McCandless’s face would darken with anger and he’d fulminate about his parents or politicians or the endemic idiocy of mainstream American life” (Krakauer 52). I understand someone wanting to turn away from the mainstream society, but he is expressing an intense loathing towards America and his parents too. Furthermore, he had exhibited self-destructive tendencies and behavior as he goes into the Alaskan winter with no proper clothing or gear, and burns his money after his car gets stuck, and breaks his oar in half because of a storm. Also, he is unable to hold relationships with others and it seems as if he cannot form those emotional connections, yet he is charismatic and charming enough to make friends easily and even get released by U.S. immigration with a charming story. Lastly, he feels no remorse or emotions for leaving these people that care about him, such as his friends he makes or his family that he abandons. All these factors that have been evident in the story point to Chris/Alex truly being mentally ill, and I believe possessing a behavioral disorder. I’m interested to see if this inquiry is correct in the second half of the book, or if Chris/Alex is simply a man I am overanalyzing. What do you all think about this analysis of Chris’s/Alex’s behavior?

    Also, as I think about the bus that Chis/Alex was found in, I do not think I would have wanted to visit it before it was airlifted to a museum. This is because I do not personally like being around death in anyway shape or form; however, I do think they should use the bus for survival exercises for people that want to what Chris/Alex attempted to do. It would be put to good use, and I think that Chris/Alex would be happy with its new use.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought about living in Alaska because I hate the heat so much (even in New England). My head was filled with fantasies of polar bears drinking from Coke bottles and living it up in a hi-tech igloo. But the more I thought about it the more I disliked the notion of moving that far north. The environment is too harsh to be enjoyable, and there are basically no theme parks in the state. Overall, I would find living in civilization in Alaska unappealing so that would be a huge no for trekking to the iconic “Stampede Trail Magic Bus” from me.
    I find “Into the Wild” to be very similar to “Arthur Gordon Pym” yet much more appealing. Much like “Pym”, the narrative is told by a writer who is telling someone else’s story. What sets the two apart is the fact that “Into the Wild” is a true story while “Pym” is pure fiction. With “Into the Wild” being a true story, I feel much more invested in every aspect of the book because I am able to ground it in reality and wonder how a person like Alex made his way across the country. While “Pym” was also very realistic in it’s story due to the authority and “factualness” in how it is told, it can be hard to become invested in Pym’s journey his journey knowing that Pym is not real and realizing that he had no lasting impact on the world.
    To continue with the comparison between “Into the Wild” and “Pym”, I found that Alex is immensely more interesting than Pym is. Pym was quite dry and reactionary, if not a tad bit overly optimistic. Alex, meanwhile, is a complex figure who follows an unorthodox ideology until the very end of his life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Tim, absolutely agree that Chris/Alex is a more complex character, and the narrator goes more in-depth with the story than just the surface layer like Poe did. Your post also had me wondering though, why do you call the main character in "Into the Wild" Alex and not Chris, or Chris/Alex? Is it because you believe that Alex was his true self, while Chris was just a figure? Just thoughts.

      Delete
  3. I think that at the moment, true crime and unsolved cases are trendy and a popular subject across the internet. However, I don’t think the fascination with mystery is anything new, we just simply hear about it more now. I think this fascination is what drove Jon Krakauer to fill in the blanks of Chris’s story. What is known about Chris’s experience is limited, and we are left to wonder the detail of his time in the wild and the events that lead to his death.
    This strongly relates back to my post from last week, and how there is a strong appeal among humans to pursue and chase after the unknown. That is what makes Into The Wild such an intriguing story. We know that why Chris left his life behind, his experiences in Alaska as a nomad, and his death are for the most part unknown. Into The Wild allows us to take this true mystery and fantasies about what could have been.

    ReplyDelete
  4. While reading the first ten chapters of Into The Wild, I have really enjoyed the book so far! Something that really caught my attention was half way through the book the way people spoke so poorly about Chris. It is like people seem to forget that this is a human being who just lost their life no matter how he went about going on his adventure.

    Many people started to speak badly about him because of how unprepared he was to go on these adventures around the world. Also, the fact that he did adventure without being prepared they assumed there had to be something mentally wrong with him. I have to disagree with these people because honestly many of us go on vacation and decide to hike a mountain or hike in the woods. Many people do not plan ahead of these sorts of things we kind of just go for it not thinking of how long the hike is, what if something bad happens, or if we have enough water with us. I do not think it is right or okay to judge him because maybe he had the same exact mind set of this that other may have? A quote that stuck out to me was “Over the past 15 years, I’ve run into several McCandless types out in the country. Same story: idealistic, energetic young guys who overestimated themselves, underestimated the country, and ended up in trouble”. This stuck out to me because this is the exact thoughts about Chris, he probably thought, I have traveled all these other places and made it out okay with not much belongings and thought he could do it again in Alaska.

    Sheila Torres

    ReplyDelete
  5. Madeleine Frost

    Throughout the opening chapters of the novel, there are several varying descriptions of McCandless. One that resonated with me was when Westerberg describes him saying: “You could tell right away that Alex was intelligent. He read a lot. Used a lot of big words. I think maybe part of what got him into trouble was that he did too much thinking” (Krakauer 18). McCandless was book smart, yes. We can see that with his incredible marks he achieved at school and with observations from other people. With that being said, he might have lacked some street smarts, especially as it related to his survival. Take, for example, an observation a pair of drifters made about McCandless: “He had a book about plants with him, and he was using it to pick berries, collecting them in a gallon milk jug with the top cut off” and “We got to talking. He was a nice kid. Said his name was Alex. And he was big-time hungry. Hungry, hungry, hungry” (30). Not only did I see this particular moment as a moment of foreshadowing, but I also thought that one who was so intelligent may be smart to realize that not everywhere has edible plants year-round. If one were to venture to colder or more barren areas, one might take a bit of time to educate themselves about the areas around them. Perhaps McCandles’ chances of survival would have been greater if he had looked into his surroundings a bit more. Ultimately, though, as we also saw in Poe’s “The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym”, nature can be unforgiving. We see that there are not many individuals who are brave enough to venture to the sea and venture to the colder regions of the world. In “Into the Wild”, the river which claims many is a dangerous place only few dare to venture. In these places, survival is not guaranteed and we see, through the actions of other people, that nature is not a force to be reckoned with.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The first ten chapters of this novel have been very intriguing. We get a great deal of information from people who Chris spent time with during his travels. Many of the people seemed to be fond of Chris and went out of their way to help him. They frequently mention how intelligent Chris was which many people questioned after his death. In the article “Into the Wild, Revisited” by David James he mentions how Krakauer didn’t remain unbiased while writing this story. I wouldn’t have thought about this if I hadn’t read the article. It does seem, having only read the first ten chapters so far, that Chris is perceived as a hero and that Krakauer wants him to be portrayed this way. I thought it was quite interesting to think about this along with how Krakauer believes the seeds Chris eats are what kills him. James brings up information that the seeds were proved to not be toxic and that Krakauer changes his thoughts about the seeds several times. I am excited to finish the rest of the novel to see what the rest of this novel entails. As for the question what draws so many people to visit the bus, I believe it is the mystery of Chris’ death and not having all the knowledge we would like to about what exactly happened throughout his journey and how exactly did he die. For the other question would I have made the journey to the bus if it was still an option, it would be a no for me. As much as I enjoy reading and learning about Chris’ adventure it is not something I would do.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I feel "Into the Wild" has a lot of contradictory ideas to it, plot wise, which only really come into play when talking about McCandless and his experiences travelling. He always seems to be enjoying himself and living the way he desires too, but on the other hand is heavily unprepared for just about anything he encounters; leading to his subsequent and unfortunate death. There's a hopefulness to his journey, but it is always pinged by this sense that something could always go wrong. But, I feel that it is this kind of experience or set of experiences that really get a reader interested and invested in his story.

    The stories we've read in the class have addressed nature as both cruel, and at the same time very beautiful, and I feel McCandless's experiences with the wild are exactly that, albeit him obviously enjoying himself more often than not. He experiences the dangerous and beauty of the natural world, but at the cost of his life. However, as a person, he lived as he wanted to and I think that draws people in, especially with how bold and unapologetic he was; he spoke his mind. I believe that he, along with the legacy he left behind, is what drives people to go to the bus and see the site. Not to mention, people are naturally curious about what happened to him, as Krakauer themselves does not fully know what happened, and of course this can also lead to a visit.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Upon beginning the novel Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer, there were multiple ideas and possible inferences made in mind regarding Christopher McCandless and his journey. Within the first few chapters, it seemed to me that Chris struggled with identity and therefore felt compelled to embark on a new adventure to address undiscovered territory of self and nature. It is interesting that he rejected and abandoned what seemed to be a decent life, and felt alienated from the ideals of his family; he did not want to be bought and consumed by material possessions. This is why Krakauer described how McCandless felt the need to be “emancipated” (22) from his old life, which was seemingly normal and privileged. We later learn from Franz that Alex was discontent with the “mainstream American life” (52). This seemingly internal conflict led him to want the life of a nomad; the life of alter ego Alexander Supertramp- A man that would have control over his agenda and travels, but no ultimate control over his fate (which is ironic how Krakauer refers to the ‘new and improved’ Alex as “master of his own destiny” (23)).
    We can learn the most about Alex’s world view and perspective through his postcard to Franz (pages 56-58), which was memorable. It made it clear that Alex condemns the “conditioned” (57) way of life typically glorified by society. Alex believed there is more to life than conformity, and possessing the courage to seek adventure seemed exemplary and rewarding. He saw it as practically taking life in your own hands and seeking fulfillment in the beauty of what the natural world has to offer. With that being said, his mindset was also seen as immature by many (74), as he went into the wilderness knowingly unprepared (it was brought to Alex’s attention by even Gallien, who warned Alex and in conclusion deemed him as proud and excited). His stubbornness ultimately got the best of him, and I am even baffled at the idea of someone so intelligent going into the wild so vulnerable; not even prepared to expect the unexpected. He instead seems to be a dreamer who challenged the idea of the unknown and conventional ideologies.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I had some trouble getting into this novel. I think it was mostly due to Krakauer’s narration and some of the ways that he presents Chris/Alex’s story, but I was able to get into the story around chapter four. With chapter four, the inclusion of Chris/Alex’s journal entries caught my attention, particularly his use of third person in his journal. This was a bit strange to me, but at the same time, “Alex” is something of a persona for Chris, so I suppose that explains the inclination to write in the third person. Reading the linked article by David James got me thinking some more, particularly when he says, “the process of mythologizing the life of Christopher McCandless began with McCandless himself” (James). This take is interesting and I agree with it, especially considering how Chris/Alex writes about his adventures in his journal and the language that he uses, as it is sometimes very detailed and written in such a way where it doesn’t feel like it belongs in a journal, if that makes sense. I wonder what Chris’s thinking was with these third-person entries--did he intend to write about his Alaskan “odyssey” after he returned?

    ReplyDelete

  10. To be completely honest "Into the Wild" and the story that Krakauer is telling to us readers annoyed me. Chris was someone with a wild dream and dove head first into it with no hesitation. Yes, something commendable, and something that many people may not have the guts to do. But you just don't go into the wilderness completely under prepared, you just don't. Chris was not prepared and was marked for death. He was foolish and only seemed to care about his cravings for living in the wild.

    That is not to say that Chris wad dumb or anything like that. He was smart, very smart, but he was just way too caught up in this dream, and did not just sit and think for a moment. I feel as if Krakauer allowed for some criticism in his story about Chris; it would be way less annoying. I agree with that article, he seems to put Chris on a pedestal and doesn't acknowledge that Chris was wrong and he messed up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Krissy,

      I agree with you completely. I think that there was a lot of romanticism of Chris's story, and especially when Krakaur included his own story to juxtapose Chris's. I think the thing that annoyed me most was that Chris shows all the clear signs of a kid that was burnt out and not getting the things he needed from home. Kids that are super smart, acheive high in school, and then one day they reach their limit. Chris went no-contact with his family, started rebeling, which is a common trope, but he took it too far. I feel like, had someone who knew him and saw it, stepped in, he might still be alive.

      The other side to this is that if someone doesn't want to be helped, you can't help them, and Chris was so adamant about doing things alone that he was basically doomed from the beginning.

      Delete
  11. Through reading the first ten chapters of "Into the Wild," I have tried to figure out what possesses Chris and explorers like him to go on these questionable expeditions and why they seem to have little or no regard for their own survival. I started with looking at commonalities between the explorers such as a dissatisfaction with the life and society they were living in(capitalistic, materialistic, comfortable) as well as hardships within their family and social dynamics. Chris experienced a power struggle with his parents throughout his teens and early twenties. He felt that they were controlling his life and he decided to walk away from his family before law school. John Waterman was described as unstable by one of his college mates. His parents divorced when he was in his teens, his father abandoned them, his brother disappeared shortly after, and 8 of his friends were either killed in climbing accidents or committed suicide. It is clear that some of these explorers have faced some trauma in their lives, but why go off on adventures ill prepared and alone?

    A quote from a passage highlighted in one of the books found with McCandless'sremains that gives some insight is from Thoreau's "Walden, or Life in the Woods:" "No man ever followed his genius till it mislead him" (pg.47). Ruess also says in a letter to his brother, "I am always overwhelmed. I require it to sustain life" (pg. 91). It seems that these explorers are in search of the unknown. They are irritated with the mundane norms that society have pushed on them. They want to challenge themselves and push themselves to limits unknown to man.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I wish we were better able to get into the mind of Chris McCandless. I find his decisions and his impact on those who he had met during his travels very interesting. We knew that his relationship with his family was somewhat off but it is not until later in the book that this is explained. Even so, it is mentioned that Chris keeps his frustrations largely to himself and that he likes to "brood." The way this work is written in a 'piecing the puzzle' sort of way allows us a glimpse into the life of McCandless, but I feel without a 1st person pov through McCandless's eyes I don't necessarily feel like the whole story is being told in "Into the Wild." Like we have discussed in class, whether or not Chris is a hero so an idiot is really hard to pin down when the 'truth' that he valued so much is shrouded by bried 3rd party accounts of short term relationships built on half-lies.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I found this story, just like many, to be absolutely fascinating and inspiring. The sad truth of Chris’s demise, similarly to the men of the Franklin expedition, was a shame. To many people, maybe even thought to be a waste. In the case of the Franklin expedition they went into it completely prepared, but were derailed by an endless winter that never melted, disease, and led poisoning. We later find out that these freak accidents, although did not allow them to go back to England, gave great insight into the land they walked on and put it on the map. In the case of Chris, he wasn't prepared enough to go out the way he did, however his death was by freak accident of simply taking the wrong wild potatoes back to the magic bus.

    Not to jump too far into the debate, although I think it can give insight into why people gathered around the bus,I think in many ways Chris was an idiot. However, the heroism that I think people saw in him by way of his story, was what he lived through and how he was able to make it out the other side. The way I saw it, Chris wanted more in life than the pain he endured during his childhood witnessing all that happened with his parents. It seemed that when he left, he pushed himself to live an extraordinary life, even if it scared him. He used the pain of his past to propel him through his journey, give him a reason to get himself to Alaska, and live in the “magic bus” for 100 days. I think that's why people are so drawn to it.

    If the “magic bus” was still there I would definitely want to go see it. I think what makes it “magic” and what Chris found to be so magical about it was how it sat on the earth as a beacon of light. It symbolized adventure,hope, new experiences, that dreams can come true, life, and the pain/ struggle it takes to get there. I definitely have mixed feelings about the bus being moved. I think the trip to get to the bus and experience it the way Chris did, in the wilderness, was authentic and as real as his journey. However, it was extremely dangerous and deserves to be put on display in a place that's easier to get to. Perhaps instead of a museum, it could have been moved to another outdoor location similar, but safer ? Either way, I'm glad his story has made such an impact on people and continues to years after his death.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I, unfortunately, now have a retroactive disdain for Into The Wild. My ex (who is trans) got their name from Alexander Supertramp and now I can't think about that character without thinking about my ex, especially saying how he strongly related to Alexander Supertramp, as they believed that, like Supertramp, they were the master of their own destiny. I didn't think that being the master of your own destiny meant you were breaking your engagement and moving to Georgia. Ah well.

    I adore urban exploration. I went to explore an abandoned school three times and even then I didn't see everything there was to see. Unfortunately, I believe there's development happening there now, so it's likely off limits, but I'd very much like to find some new places to explore. Even something as simple as a train car or a bus can be so intriguing to me. I love delving into the history of these abandoned locations or artifacts. If I could have gone to visit this bus, I would have. I can only imagine the stories an artifact like that could tell.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Alexandra Ritacco
    In class, there was a lot of talk on McCandless being a psychopath or sociopath. I feel as though that is so far from the truth! Also, it is unfair to give a diognosis of a person no longer here. Perhaps he was, I do not know. Personally, I think he was a lost boy who craved to be anywhere, but home. His home life was not spectacular. He wanted to be free off all the restrictions of society. While I do not think he should be celebrated as he was a fool for traveling as he did, there is something people can learn from Chris. Sometimes the simplicity of nature can bring one more happiness than monetary possessions. While his journey killed him and he should be mimicked, I believe this trip was perhaps the happiest he had ever been.

    What drove him to leave it all was having it all. He probably associated it with his parents, who were abusive to him. I believe exploration is a personal thing. We all have our why that drives us.

    ReplyDelete