In light of Krakauer's self-expression, do you find his recount of Chris' story more or less credible? Explain your answer
I believe Krakauer's story about how he climbed the Stikine Ice Cap and climbed the thumb and what not. His story parallels that of Chris' story so similarly it is hard for me to believe which one is true in its entirety. I find it extremely hard to believe that Krakauer just happened to write the magazine article about Chris and have a story of his own that is so similar. For me, it makes Chris' story less credible because I feel like Krakauer chose to leave out parts of McCandless' story so eventually when I got to chapers 14 and 15, I would see the parallels easier. Everything from their parents to their reasons for their adventures to their struggle for survival in the wilderness all seems a little fudged. I don't want to believe that this is true, I want to believe that Krakauer is telling us the whole truth but in reality, he isn't. I think for this very reason, I began to feel as if Chris' story lost a bit of its credibility. This, however, could also go in the other way. Maybe Krakauer's story is ambiguous to be able to match Chris' meaning that Chris' story still holds true. Whichever the case is, we will probably never know for sure, but I can state that I feel that Krakauer is holding out on something whether it is with his or Chris' story.
16 years ago
I totally agree with you with the story being similar thing. It could have been that since Krakauer had a similar story to Chris that he had to write an article about him. It is a little fishy though to actually have an almost exact story about himself having troubles with him father. Maybe Krakauer needed to include a part in the story to make it seem as if he understood Chris's story more personally. There is no telling what secret lie behind this story, but what is done is done, and he definitely wrote about himself and his father having trouble. So I guess that's what we have to believe.
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way. I think because Krakauer wrote this book there will never really be a way of knowing how truthfull the stories are that he shares. I think the parallels he found with himself and Chris could be true, but I also believe that he did fudge them, and that made the image of Chris become a little distorted. Its frustrating not being able to know what Krakauer is keeping from us, because there has to be something more, something deeper that we are not being told
ReplyDeleteI never really thought of it that way, but you make a really good point and that is really something to think about. When I think about it like that, you really are right. It all does seem a little ironic that their stories are so similair. Although maybe that was the reason why Krakauer chose to write about this particular story. Never know.
ReplyDelete