By Jon Krakauer
Child mortality is a topic that I struggle with. Everyone who has lost a child frames losses within their own contexts. We all wonder what life would be like if our losses never happened. We all continue to grieve anew every time we hear of another child’s life being cut short far before it was time. I can’t imagine the burden Into the Wild by Krakauer placed on the McCandless family.
l often find myself gazing out the window asking questions that don’t have answers. What would my daughter think of the weather today? I wonder if my daughter would be a Swifty? Would my daughter have liked that dinner I made or would she have joined in with the other kids and refused to eat it?
The McCandless family must have those questions but then multiplied by 100 due to the public nature of this book and their son’s death. How can they do anything without a steady stream of reminders of what could have been and what they could have done differently. This breaks my heart.
I think that Jon Krakauer understood what his original reporting did to the McCandless family and to Christopher’s legacy and tried to make it a little better with this book. He tried to correct the record on what he was doing in Alaska. He gathered more evidence on his life while there and what circumstances finally led to his demise. He pointed out how hard it is to criticize someone’s choices when you don’t know the full story. But, most importantly, Krakauer celebrated that boy’s life and clearly laid out what he believed in and why he chose to live the way he did.
My resolution after reading this book is to try to judge less and offer help more. If my help is not accepted, well, I will try to offer it in a better way next time.
What part of Into the Wild are you having a hard time moving on from? Let me know in the comments and thank you for being here!