Literature Analysis #5

1.    Briefly summarize the plot of the novel you read according to the elements of plot you've learned in past courses (exposition, inciting incident, etc.).  Explain how the narrative fulfills the author's purpose (based on your well-informed interpretation of same).

Into the wild is not written in a chronological order of events but written in a way where we get to understand Chris as a person and why he did the things he did. Right off the back (even in the summary of the book) it is stated that Chris dies. But how Chris dies and his journey to his final days is what makes the story. In the exposition we are given back ground information about his parents, families, and previous life along with the scene to where he is actually dying or is found dead. The inciting incident would have to be when the readers get to the part of the story (again) where Chris meets Jim Gallien to get a ride to Anchorage. This then leads to the climax of Chris’s adventure of actually living out in the wilderness, to the falling action of how he could have possibly died, and Jon Krakaeur investigating the death. The purpose of this book was to tell a story about a man who had intentions and was naively killed. What happens to be most intriguing about Chris as a character was that he had everything going for him with grades, athletics, and family, yet he decided to get rid of everything?

2. Succinctly describe the theme of the novel. Avoid cliches.

The fact that this book is not biography or novel and more of a non-fiction genre about the life of Chris Mccandless, makes it hard to depict what type of themes are in the novel. A theme I could think of though is to be cautious and knowledgeable about big risks you can take in life. If you jump into an idea very naively you might not get the results you expect. Chris was hoping to live off the land for a month or so, and despite being very intelligent he failed miserably which led to his death.
3. Describe the author's tone. Include a minimum of three excerpts that illustrate your point(s).

Krakauer’s tone throughout the book was understanding and unbiased. He never really took sides on peoples remarks about whether Chris was naïve and idiotic or intellectually curious.

“When Mccandless turned up dead in Alaska… many people concluded that the boy must have been mentally disturbed. The article about McCandless in Outside generated a large volume of mail, and not a few of the letters heaped opprobrium on McCandless- and on me, as well, the author of the story, for glorifying what some thought was a foolish, pointless death.” (Pg. 72)

“I encounter evidence of McCandless’s presence where my vision rests…I feel uncomfortable, as if I were intruding, a voyeur who has slipped into McCandless’s bedroom while he is momentarily away.” (Pg. 178)

“Starvation is not a pleasant way to expire…it would be nice to think McCandless experienced a similar rapture” (pg. 198)

4. Describe a minimum of ten literary elements/techniques you observed that strengthened your understanding of the author's purpose, the text's theme and/or your sense of the tone. For each, please include textual support to help illustrate the point for your readers. (Please include edition and page numbers for easy reference.) 

(1 & 2)“Nor was McCandless endowed with a surfeit of common sense” (Pg. 65) Direct Characterization/ foreshadowing. In this passage that we get this quote from, the reader learns about Chris’s working skills and what type of person he is. This is part of direct characterization. The foreshadowing of this statement is that it correlates to Chris’s naivetés and common sense of surviving off the land. He was very intellectual but just because a person is intellectual doesn’t mean they can adapt and learn in sudden changes in environment.

(3)” Perhaps inevitably, parallels have been drawn between John Waterman and Chris McCandless. Comparison have also been drawn between McCandless and Carl McCunn…” (Pg. 81) Didactic. The use of the comparison of these characters is to try and understand the intentions and journey of Chris McCandless. Krakauer uses these comparisons to also provide another insight of understandment.

(4) “A half century later McCandless sounds eerily like Ruess when he declares in a postcard to Wayne Westerberg that “I’ve decided that I’m going to live this life for some time to come…” (pg 92) Allusion. The frequent allusions used in the book correlate to Chris’s constant of reading a variety of books. He read things from Tolstoy to Thoreau.

(5) “Everett twice etched the name Nemo- Latin for ‘nobody’- into the soft Navajo sandstone” Epitaph (pg. 93) This reference to Everett is used as a way to show the deterioration of a persons mind living in the wilderness. Another fact to understand Chris’s snow bound expedition.

(6) “Reading of these monks, one is moved by their courage, their reckless innocence, and the urgency of their desire. Reading of these monks, one can’t help thinking of Everett Ruess and Chris McCandless” (page 97) Analogy. The journey of Chris McCandless is quite an interesting one because there have been many stories similar, but his has stuck out the most. Using this comparison explores the importance Chris is to Jon.

(7) “… The troopers immediately shifted their search there for the hiker’s next of kin. An all points- bulletin turned up a missing person named McCandless from eastern South Dakota…” Analysis (Pg. 100) This passage was a very long passage describing the process it took to find Chris after getting the missing persons report. The passage went very in depth of how the process went.

(8) “The hardest part… is simply not having him around anymore.” Dialogue (Pg. 104). Even though dialogue is almost in every book and a very beginner term to use, it had a prominent use in this book. Taking into accounts the many people Chris met, Jon was able to get to know the type of guy Chris was.

(9) “He kept track of everything and showed me how to do it…” Indirect characterization. (Pg. 120) Through out the book, the audience was scattered by personal accounts of Chris through other people’s eyes. He was indirectly characterized by his actions like helping people with their jobs, or quitting his job randomly. This helps the audience better understand him.

(10) “Both were perceived to have lacked a requisite humility…” pg. 180. Understatement.

CHARACTERIZATION 
1. Describe two examples of direct characterization and two examples of indirect characterization.  Why does the author use both approaches, and to what end

(i.e., what is your lasting impression of the character as a result)?

Two examples…. I will actually combine this because since this book is a biography type book, there are a lot of direct characterizations from other people. Indirectly, it was his actions of traveling through rigorious and risky situations that we have assumed that Chris is a fearless and adventurous being. He studied well for some potential risky situations, sometimes succeeding, and ultimately in the end doesn’t. Directly, there are way too many examples to include, he was mostly coined as a gentle, loving, and kind intellectual being. I think the author uses both approaches because since Chris is dead, we can’t really ask him directly to understand his point of views and perspectives on certain subjects to understand the person he is. So when asking other people for accounts on him, we get a more genuine and complete answer of who he was by the people he affected.
2. Does the author's syntax and/or diction change when s/he focuses on character?  How?  Example(s)?

 No I don’t really think that the author’s syntax or diction changes when he focuses on the character. I think it changes only when he gives his opinion but besides that, to tell the story Kraukaeur tries to give it from Chris’s point of view.
3. Is the protagonist static or dynamic?  Flat or round?  Explain. Honestly its hard to tell because he’s dead. Jk. But really I think he is a very dynamic character and round character because he adapts very much to every condition he is put in and at the same time impacts every person he meets. He has affected them each differently that they all were shocked that his end came so soon and very young.
4. After reading the book did you come away feeling like you'd met a person or read a character?  Analyze one textual example that illustrates your reaction. 

Yes I did. The way that Krakauer presents Chris, is as if he was a person that you knew. The stories other people would tell about Chris definitely reminds the audience about that one person who was just always innately good and never  did anything to harm anyone.