Warning: This post contains spoilers
I first saw the movie of the same title, and didn’t know
the story so it came as quite a shock. The story is of a young man (Christopher
McCandless aka Alexander Supertramp) who gives away his life’s savings, turns
away from his family and spends his life hitch hiking around America. Like most
who see the movie I was inspired to do some hiking as the movie casts the story
in a romantic and inspirational light. The book is similar though more raw.
The book is really interesting in that it expands more deeply
into the motives of Christopher, the type of person he was and some of his home
life. It paints an even more confusing story of the young man that the movie
does. It helps to read the book to get
this extra information, though it brings the reader no closer to understanding
the motivation behind the man’s journey. It is worth noting that the book still
doesn’t give a complete story, and attempts to fill some gaps, particularly in
Alaska. Supertramp’s diary of the time was numbered, often consisting of only one
word entries. Krakauer has extrapolated from these in a way which may or may
not be true. This makes for a more coherent book, which is more or less true,
though may not be considered strictly factual.
Now for the spoiler, there seem to be two camps on
Supertramp, some find him to be an inspirationally tale of someone searching
for adventure but getting more than he bargained for, or maybe just got out of
his depth. While others see him as overconfident and arrogant walking into the
wilderness with no skills, no real plan, improper equipment and ultimately dying
needlessly. The movie makes many people lean towards the former. I however side
with the latter.
As a quick aside, the movie makes it seem like he ate a
poisonous plant by mistake while Krakauer later wrote an article claiming
Supertramp may have eaten the correct plant, but what most do not know is that
while this plant is generally save, when people are underfeed and working hard
it becomes poisonous to the system. Sadly the way I see it, either way he
starved to death because he was not properly prepared. Either way, he was
already starving and poisoned or not he was going to starve to death. Many
people, particularly Alaskans were angry about his death because it was so
needless. I feel the same way because so many find his story a source of inspiration.
But it’s a story of being intentionally ill prepared leading to death.
There is a line in the book “a
challenge in which a successful outcome is assured
isn't a challenge at all “. This struck
such a chord with one reader they underlined it (I borrowed the book from my
local library). While this may be true, having the proper equipment, even just
the addition of a map, still would not have assured a successful outcome for
Supertramp, but it would have been a more humble sign, a greater respect of the
danger he put himself in.
The book is a good read; Krakauer is quite a good author
so the odd personality of Supertramp doesn’t affect the reading of the book. I
suggest giving it a read to make up your own mind; maybe you’ll think I’m being
far too harsh.
Hiya. I don't think you are being too harsh at all! Perhaps I am harsher but I don't see how a true passion for the outdoors cannot be paired with survival skills, especially if your goal is to live in the wild for any time. Anything else is a variation of insanity and that is my view of this book/movie character: he is inspirational but also has a classic Shakespearian flaw in that he loves nature in an idealistic sense but not a practical one. Hence his end. Still a great story!
ReplyDelete