allthumbs Posted November 15, 2002 Posted November 15, 2002 Perhaps you have noticed or read the book by Jon Krakauer called "Into the Wild," in which he recounts the dismal demise of a young man of the alienated generation who decided he would wander off into the wilderness and live off the land by his own wit and ingenuity. The trouble was that, as with most of the alienated generation, his wit and ingenuity were insufficient, and he starved to death on the northern approaches of Mount McKinley during the summer. It is quite possible for a serious woodsman to survive on his own in the wilderness. The great Charles Sheldon did just that many years ago when he took off alone into the wilderness of Denali to spend the winter discovering what the mountain sheep did in the cold weather. He came out in the spring with the information that he had sought - but he knew what he was doing. Hippies as a rule do not know what they are doing, and, as in this case, they often fall victim to what may be characterized as arrogant incompetence. cooper Quote
forrest_m Posted November 15, 2002 Posted November 15, 2002 arrogant incompetence is hardly the sole domain of the hippies. ask anyone with SAR experience how many good ol’ boys they’ve had to had to look for over the years… the usual equation is overconfidence + bad luck = hypothermia. but I think you make an interesting point – sort of a reversal of the usual freedom to vs. freedom from argument. freedom from rules in this case = freedom to die from hypothermia. lots of "hippies" deliberately ignore the way things were usually done because they find value in being free to invent their own system. this attitude may be more well suited to reexamining your role in society or rejecting your parents' narrow-minded religion than to surviving the alaskan winter. Quote
RobBob Posted November 15, 2002 Posted November 15, 2002 trask, I read that book yrs ago and couldn't help but have nothing but disdain for the 'protagonist,' and pity for his parents. If you want to go into those kinds of woods, you have to be a 'hunter.' That kid was the opposite of a 'hunter.' Personality trait---you either have it or you don't. Rob Quote
Juneriver Posted November 15, 2002 Posted November 15, 2002 If I recall right, Chris Mccandless (sp?) didn't just starve to death like an arrogent rookie in the woods. He actually lived out there for a couple of months on his hunting and gatheing skills. He actually killed a moose with a .22. In the end, he was cut off from walking out by a flodd stage river, and accidentally ate some toxic plant (previously unkown to be toxic) that would not allow his body to process any other foods. Hence, his "starving" to death. I think he made mistakes in preparedness for out there... but he was doing fine until a mistake caused a chain of events leading to his death. Kinda sounds like what causes climbing accidents, don't it. I don't really agree all with his dirtbagging ways, or the way he treated his parents.. but to say the guy was stupid cause he couldn't take care of himself is wrong. Quote
RobBob Posted November 15, 2002 Posted November 15, 2002 When I read the book, I got the impression that it was not confirmed, only theorized, about the toxic plant. Krakauer spent a lot of time trying to identify with Chris and understand him. The kid was lost in a dream-world, complete with his own stage-name. If you're in the woods to "find yourself," you're likely to find yourself up shit creek. Quote
RobBob Posted November 15, 2002 Posted November 15, 2002 I say, Dr. Amazing, your avatar looks as if you're ready for the horse-race party in the parlour of the Queen Mary... Quote
Dru Posted November 16, 2002 Posted November 16, 2002 He went out to live in the world or die trying, and he died. But the fact he was a hippy type is extraneous. Ive seen plenty of rednecks that dont know jack squat about living in the woods either. Mostly in the Chilliwack valley on summer weekends Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted November 16, 2002 Posted November 16, 2002 Who knows anything about the fellow after reading Krakauer's book? Krakauer was so heavy-handed in his portrayal that it was impossible to glean a clean view of the chap. A strange book, to say the least, reaking of solipsism. Quote
Dru Posted November 16, 2002 Posted November 16, 2002 i say whats all this fellow and chap stuff, old bean? Quote
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted November 16, 2002 Posted November 16, 2002 It's top-shelf British idiom, old boy, and DFA would dare say he earns bonus points for throwing in the Word of the Day, i.e. "solipsism." Good show, mate! Quote
RobBob Posted November 16, 2002 Posted November 16, 2002 You yobs miss the point of trask's thread. Back in our day, that young lout would've been properly flogged, and told to quit his puelin', eat his gruel, an' get back to work like a good lad. Quote
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted November 16, 2002 Posted November 16, 2002 Gor blimey! It's turnin' into a reg'lar cockney tea party in 'ere, it is. 's enough to make a chap spew tea an' crumpets jus' lookin' at it. Quote
cj001f Posted November 16, 2002 Posted November 16, 2002 quote: Originally posted by RobBob: You yobs miss the point of trask's thread. Back in our day, that young lout would've been properly flogged, and told to quit his puelin', eat his gruel, an' get back to work like a good lad. Silly me! I thought it was to bash them liberals....... [ 11-15-2002, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: cj001f ] Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.