I relate to this movie - Into the Wild (2007) Discussion

[–] Aloft 12 years ago

I think it is interesting how most people interpret his mentality as arrogant. I think a lot of people have just seen other people saying that, and since it kind of hits the territory they agree and then go on to repeat it, and on and on. There isn't a whole lot of thought being put into what the word *arrogance* means, and how it applies to the character.

I myself do not see much evidence for arrogance in the character of Chris. He seems to approach everyone that he meets with an even level of acceptance, he's very non-judgemental, and willing to become friends with the sorts of people that the truly arrogant would scoff at (or worse, project their disgust like a bully in that person's face). Even when he is in LA and looks across the barrier at the rich people eating fancy food, his face doesn't convey any sense of disdain or disapproval---it's more like he's trying to figure out what it is that entices these people toward the life. He in fact tries to project *himself* into that context as a way of understanding it, but ultimately fails to grasp what it is they are doing, what keeps them there. That open approach to people who are different than you shows a strength of character and understanding that most people do not have.

I would say the closest he comes to arrogance is in the relatively innocent fashion that all young 20 year olds are. They think they have some stuff figured out about life, and they are eager to share their discoveries with those around them. They are book smart, in many cases, because they've just spent the majority of life with their nose in a book and being tested on it. They are used to being judged by how well they can do that, and so they present themselves to others via the things they have learned and the thoughts they believe to be true. This is a form of arrogance, but it's like I say, an innocent phase that most kids go through at this point in their life. It's certainly not worth maligning the character over! Perhaps the people that have a reaction to this are just not used to seeing films which do a good job of depicting accurate psychology.

So what is the flaw that people are calling arrogance? Because there is a flaw, he isn't very well adjusted socially speaking. That isn't to say he can't get along with people, the opposite is the truth. He's actually very good at making friends, making people feel comfortable, and forming relationships of deep trust without much effort or time at all. Consider the psychological implications of that. For anyone that wonders how someone can walk away from a friendship, forever, with a smile on their face--try and do what Chris did and project yourself into this psychology. Try and understand what friendship would be like to someone who can naturally and easily form friendships with nearly anyone he runs into. To be such a social chameleon that he can win the trust of conservative old men, criminals, naked Europeans, old burned out hippies, the cynical aide worker behind the counter at a shelter--it doesn't matter! He has a natural gift for blending in and finding the type of personality that makes another person tick, slipping right into their world like an old friend. If you could do that, how much easier would it be to love deeply, but quickly, and then move on to the next person? And if you lived that way perpetually, how difficult would it be to comprehend initially, or even remember once you knew it, that other people have to work hard to make friends, and that thus losing friends is a great emotional travesty for them. How hard would it be to understand that this can end up mapping over to family as well. That once you leave your family behind, there is nothing left to bind you to them. To live in a social present-tense that is intense and real and in a way richer than most friendship on a planet, but forgetful of everyone that has come and gone?

See, I'm just like this character in many ways. I can hang with just about everyone on the planet, and I can become deeply invested in a friendship, in a reciprocal fashion, in no time at all. I just have a natural skill for reading people and instinctively becoming the right person for them, and in doing so my psychology morphs into them being the right person for me. It isn't manipulation, or if it is, it is mutual manipulation. But that, combined with the fact that I moved around a lot as a child, caused me to never grow up understanding the pain of separation. I am over losses quickly, and while I think nostalgically of the friends I've made in the past, I don't ever feel the urge to rekindle them either. It took me many years to realise that I was hurting people, living the way Chris was. I dare say I was a bit older than he was when I realised it, and *quite* a bit older before I could learn how to stop "moving on". To me, that's just how friendship was performed. Quickly, deeply, beautifully rich, and then on to the next person. That is how I grew up, that is how I lived. I had no idea the wake of sorrow I left behind me.

That is not arrogance, it's largely ignorance, but I can see how those who did not grow up with that psychology could mistakenly think it is. It's a pity that the film didn't convey this psychology in a fashion that others could easily fathom or read. That's one of its major failings in my opinion. It does *such* a good job of portraying the mind of one who is like me, but it did it so well that many people just don't quite know how to translate it.

reply

[–] sabar-1 12 years ago

Thank you for the thought provoking post. I'm one of the viewers who sat watching and thinking the character was arrogant and nearly unlikable. I believe that viewers are seeing him from their own particular places in the world - upbringings, values, etc.

I found him "arrogant", if that is the right word, for the following reason: I grew up in a poor rural area bordering on Appalachia. I knew families with dirt floors. Presently, I work with many inner city African Americans, who experience a similar pain. If they don't heroically rise above their circumstances and get out of Dodge, they are judged harshly. Even if they have a job - getting to work every day to do a crap job - they are still referred to "shiftless and lazy" and "on welfare". My heart goes out to both sets of people and it irritates me to no end for people who had basically decent lives to act as if they must escape some sort of horror and pain. Just having a nice home and good food is a huge jump over many people in this world.

Everyone has problems and poor folks don't have a lock on "pain". But I found this guy self centered. One of the moments that jumped out at me was his walking away from the car. All I could think was that someone could have used that car. A person with ill health who can no longer work....a single mother who has been abandoned by her man.....an elderly widow who must walk to a bus stop to get anywhere.

And I disagreed that it was ok to cause his family such distress, especially his sister. That is a huge example of selfishness. I can't imagine anything worse than not knowing what has happened to a family member. His family was flawed, but isn't everyone? They did care about him whether he thought they deserved caring in reverse.

In any case, it's a compelling story. It's interesting that this person pushes different buttons in different people.

Rachel

reply

[–] Aloft 12 years ago

Well there is no doubt that as long as humans fester, there will be a long and gradual gradient between the human that suffers the most in any given instant and the human that suffers least, and more complexly, the humans of similar age that can be said to have suffered more or less than one another throughout the summation of their lives thus far. I do think that most of us are aware of that. The question is: to what degree should be shape our lives around the knowledge of that? Do we judge those who shape their lives less (or more) negatively? Just hold that thought for a moment.

What is arrogance, is when you look at your station in life, and view those of different contexts from you as being inferior to you–and then, on top of that, use or manifest that sense of superiority in a way which directly impinges upon the rights, values, or preferences of others.

Upon that definition, feeling dissatisfied with your life and wanting to change it (however you set out to do so), is not enough to qualify as arrogance. I don’t think you are arguing for calling it that. I don’t honestly see how much of human activity in general could be defined as anything but all of us trying to change something, day to day. Chris just took it a little further than most people do.

Perhaps it is best to look at his philosophy? Was he not, after all, rebelling against these stratums that separate the human condition? He believed that the accumulation of wealth was an unhealthy component of society, deplored to its very roots the way he had been brought up for that reason, and felt the only just and right thing to do was to stop taking advantage of the support system that is built by poorer people so that wealthy people like him could live easy. He was stepping out of that, boycotting it you might say. He was keenly aware of what we are discussing, and trying to not only condemn it but take action against it with his own life. I don’t see how this could be decreed as arrogance or selfishness. Wasn’t he, in a sense, doing what I was just referring to above–actually living his life in accordance with a great spectrum of condition by donating and then giving up his expensive way of life?

One of the moments that jumped out at me was his walking away from the car.

I got the impression that the car was irreparably damaged, or least not to a level that could be repaired right then and there. It had been damaged by the flood. Why else would he leave it, at that point, right after a flood? I think that would be a pretty good motivator to continue using it until you are out of the flash flood area, if you could. It seems more likely to me that the car was totalled, and that sparked the idea to just get rid of everything except for the essentials, even money. Up until that point he was driving and carrying cash around. What changed? The car broke. It triggered a response.

This is, after all, a guy that just dropped a $23,000 check on a charity ($37,500 adjusted for inflation)—a check that is not, let’s be clear, a shaving off of the side of his ledger, but much of what he had left to his name and his future along the path of success. I’m sure, if he was planning to give the car away, he would have done so if he could have.

Instead, like I say, I think he just had a flash of inspiration triggered by a disaster. He decided to make lemonaide out of losing his car and take his journey to the next level. Once he did that, he found that he liked that way of living and kept on with it.

And I disagreed that it was ok to cause his family such distress, especially his sister. That is a huge example of selfishness.

I can’t disagree with that, but again this strikes me as being more within the “innocence” of youth. The rebellious borderland where the mind goes through its last, and necessary, spurts of total-questioning. Some people take that further than others. Some people disappear and never return. Other people wear black shirts and lipstick. Some people commit the scandalous act of skipping church for the first and last time in their entire life.

Yeah, the harsher end of that rebellious phase can be tough on a family, but it’s got to happen however that individual needs it to happen, and it’s in the same realm as a child striking another child on the playground. It’s wrong, but it’s not a character flaw at that point, not yet. It may become one, if it persists, but it’s too early to say. That’s all we mean when we refer to the innocence of youth. It’s not that young people are innocent, we just don’t know yet if their normal human feisty behaviour is going to be a part of who they are, we can’t separate the natural patterns in the growing process, with who they are yet.

For all we know, if he had survived his ordeal, he would have gradually come to the realisation that pulling away from life wasn’t the answer to the world’s problems, and perhaps one day he would have ended up a loving member of the family–maybe even the one that allows it to finally fully heal? That wouldn’t as a matter of fact, be all that abnormal.

Lest this come across as a broadside defence of the fictional Chris as shown in the film, I would like reiterate my initial sentiments: he was a flawed personal in some crucial areas. He had some emotional and connection issues, and he made a lot of mistakes. But there is one thing that I believe shines through all of that, and he was if not anything else, a genuine person. He believed that what he was doing was right, and he had a wealth of empathy and emotion for everyone he came across (whether or not he could show in a “proper” fashion is another matter). Arrogance is not any of these things.

reply

[–] sabar-1 12 years ago

I believe you are correct about arrogance, which is why I questioned my use of the word. I do think, however, that he possibly felt superior to his parents - he felt morally superior, and he may have been correct, but it's distasteful.

Suffering is an interesting notion because we really do not have a way to measure one person's suffering over another's. Mental health has a LOT to do with this. Why do some folks with seemingly ok lives kill themselves? They are no longer able to bear a mental pain. Others can go thru unimaginable situations and carry on.

I think my opinions have more to do with "waste" than anything else. It didn't occur to me until I re-read my post and read yours. My grandmother felt that waste was an actual sin - if you wasted something that could have been used by someone else in need, you were being selfish. I tend to agree. I did not remember the car scenes in enough detail apparently - I didn't think of the situation as a "dead" car.

I do see that immaturity probably played a part. Teens and young adults make the dumbest mistakes, all the while believing themselves to be smarter than the entire rest of the world. But this is why such extreme independence should not be encouraged, especially in someone with no experience in the outside world, pardon the pun. And I will always have a problem with the pain he caused his family. The one scene I will never forget is Hurt falling in the street, which probably speaks more to his acting than the story, but there it is. Random phone calls to let them know he was alive would have been enough. I believe that no one has the right to willingly cause that amount of grief and anxiety in others who care about them.

Rachel

reply

[–] scottt-44876 9 years ago

Rachel, you posted years ago so I am not sure if you will get this at all. This movie did not include a lot of information that is needed to understand Chis. Maybe you have researched him and know now what am going to write. Chis was raised in a very abusive home. His father and mother always fought and forced him to watch. His father had two families and lots of other children. You would need to research the truth about his life.

Chris had a minimum of post traumatic stress disorder. His parents caused him serious mental and physical distress his whole life with them. He had to escape. Many people in life have to escape this. Mental health professionals will tell victims like he was to escape the situation. I know from being told this by Mental health professionals (I am not saying the course he took would be approved by the AMA. I am saying he was suffering from the constant abuse he was subjected to since he was born. Every person who suffers abuse handles it differently some become drunks, some become abusers themselves....etc..) It is impossible to live life in an environment where you never get a moments peace. His parents were abusive and very controlling. The only way for him to escape was to leave his whole family.
Chis was seriously damaged and he was getting his therapy through nature.

reply

[–] sabar-1 9 years ago

Actually, I have IMDB set to email any responses so I did get it. Yay!
Thanks for the info. I did not know all of this about him. Makes a huge difference.

🐈 Rachel

reply

[–] amandabom 12 years ago

You remind me of my best friend . He's loved by everyone he meets, he truly sees people and can tune into them, and in many cases meeting him is a life changing experience for them, but never for him. I worry about his " inability" to lose himself to someone else. To fall in love and let someone love him.. But he restlessly moves on , and I can see in his eyes that he loves us , but doesn't need us or depends un us. I worry that he'll be lost to me and those who love him someday..

reply

[–] Vanlandi 12 years ago

Aloft,very interesting post.. you are talking about the lack of empathy and that's a lot worse than arrogance .. It's the beginning of a sociopath. And the special ability of this kind of people is exactly the "social chameleon", just because he can't feel emotions at the same level of others..
Sometimes, I feel like going into the woods, but the first thing that stops me are the ones I live for .. As someone said here, the guy never say a word about his family , sister , etc .. I don't know the book or the real story , but as this movie shows he showed some symptoms of a sociopath:

"

Callous unconcern for the feelings of others;
Gross and persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social norms, rules, and obligations;
Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships, though having no difficulty in establishing them;
Very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, including violence;
Incapacity to experience guilt or to profit from experience, particularly punishment;
Markedly prone to blame others or to offer plausible rationalizations for the behavior that has brought the person into conflict with society.

" ..

reply

[–] savaslikesmovies 12 years ago

Rather what tendencies a sociopath has, not what is needed to be a sociopath.

What you describe, many, many people seem to portray. There is a lot more going in our heads then those basic concepts of emotion and actions.

reply

[–] Vanlandi 12 years ago

Symptoms .. If many, many people seem to portray , then they for sure have to check if there is a bigger problem.A symptom is not a diagnose..

I want to be clear : a sociopath is not a schizoid or a psychopath. It's just someone who has problems being the "social animal" : some because of abuse, some genetic,education etc. .. This problem can evolve, or not .. But yes, this is a problem.

reply

[–] scottt-44876 9 years ago

I do not think you understand the movie or Chis the real person. Although he suffered an abusive childhood with his parents being abusive to each other and him. They made him watch them fight.

Chis rejected his parents and he did not want to be anything like them. He did not reject society. He rejected his fathers views. Chis did fit into society and made lots of friends, he was very social. He was private because he knew his parents would not let him go so he did not want them to find him. He worked and held jobs. He wanted the freedom to take long breaks from work so he could go on nature trips. He was an extraordinary person but many people would do what he did if they could or had the courage to. He did not need a huge bank account or need lots of possessions to make him happy. He obviously did enjoy people and having friends. It was clear in the film and from what I have researched was true about him.

reply

[–] scottt-44876 9 years ago

"I don't know the book or the real story , but as this movie shows he showed some symptoms of a sociopath:"

You don't know so maybe you should inform yourself before posting. There is a lot of information about him available books written, movies...., The one thing not really clearly explained in the movie is that Chris was seriously abused as a child. His parents would have major fights and make him witness them. He had a very abusive upbringing.

Your suggestion of Chris as a Sociopath is plain wrong and rude to post. I think it is terrible for you to write it with no research on him at all. We are talking about a real person who had a tragic death.

Chis rejected his parents and did not want to be like them. He did not reject people or society. He would make nature trips. He did not survive and live in nature. Many people enjoy getting off to nature for extended periods that is all Chis did. He had many friends and made friends easily. He also did not blame people, he rejected his parents because of their constant fighting and abuse to each other and to him. He had to escape them for his sanity and health.
He had jobs. He wanted the freedom to not work when he did not want to. He just did not want to be tied down. There are millions of people like that around the world and most are not sociopaths. Chris suffered a lot from his parents and was probably damaged by it but he realized it and his therapy was to get away from his abusers and to enjoy nature when he could.

reply

[–] bud380 11 years ago

I agree with some points about the character, but I view his motivation entirely different, I see him as a person who is fed up with the mundane natures of ordinary life and wants to experience the world around him, the real world, not the advertised world of civilization and people, but the world as it is.

The ending helps to solidify this belief for me as it shows him laughing and happy instead of cold and desperate, which he should've been, but he wasn't. He'd tested himself, but more than that, he experienced things that a majority of people would never experience in their entire lives. Doing what he did takes not just a lot of bravery, but a lot of intelligence too.

I can only dream of doing what he did. At most, I can hope to take a road-trip across the US.

reply

[–] LooseCed 11 years ago

I felt a similar connection to this movie though I didn't grow up like you did, and I just wanted to say this was a very eloquent & well thought out post that I'm saving elsewhere for perspective on my own psychology.

reply

[–] zwolf 11 years ago

I think Chris was a rampant narcissist with a highly romanticized view of himself. He was an educated-but-stupid idealistic dreamer who, like all idealistic dreamers in this imperfect world, crashed and failed when he ran into reality. I don't know that he was arrogant so much as ignorant. Unfortunately, he didn't know enough to know that he didn't know everything, and he ended up paying a big price for it. I don't think he even knew what he thought most of the time; his writing was pretentious, poetic twaddle that really has no meaning when you analyze it at all; it, like all his other plans, sounded good but didn't really mean anything. It's a sad waste, but it was inevitable.

reply

[–] fede_4488 8 years ago

I don't know that he was arrogant so much as ignorant

Speaking of which... 👋

reply

[–] WileyDairyGnome 11 years ago

I do think that he underestimated how much he needed...someone. It's weird. So I watched this movie for first time on Christmas or the day after and I was so annoyed by it. I rolled my eyes constantly and I was just...irritated. Then I watched it again the next day, and again a day later and...yeah I've seen it 4 times since then. I usually don't watch movies that often and if I do I get tired of them and have to take a break for a while. I don't know what it is about this movie but...yeah.

I do think that he did made some pretty stupid choices. One could say that burning your money is stupid, but I understand why he did that. I, however, do not understand why he didn't prepare himself better for his "Great Alaskan Adventure" I think that's what he called it...so yeah, at first that really bothered me.

But I guess, ultimately, it just doesn't really matter. While I wish he had been smarter about it, he did what he wanted to do.

-- I am a traveler of both time and space, to be where I have been

reply

[–] jmachalik 11 years ago

Chris didn't leave to hurt anyone. He left to find himself. Anyone who grows up in a family like this (as you stated that you had, and I obviously had because Iam replying to your post), will have many of the same feelings Chris had. My life parallels Chris's in many ways.

reply

[–] scottt-44876 9 years ago

Spot on. I agree. Good post.

reply

[–] ckmsaxophone 11 years ago

I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head. When people don't understand Chris or the reasons why he did what he did, it's usually because they don't grasp the logic behind it; they can't relate to it.

I think most "Chris condemners" believe that he was stupid or ignorant going into the Alaskan wilderness and dying, assuming that death was part of his plan. He wanted help in the end, we know that. He made a mistake. We're all human.

Maybe they don't understand why a kid of 22 years old would leave almost all earthly possessions behind, donate $24,000 to charity, lose contact with friends and family (to make new friends and family), and live a tramping existence. It's a breath of fresh air for me, really. We grow up with the idea that we constantly need stuff. And that we can only be happy when we have more and more. Status is a big part of it, too. I commend people like Chris who choose to distance themselves from that lifestyle. In all honesty, how does it benefit the world? How does it even benefit the person?!

The lesson Chris learned was a good one: lose stuff, but not the people. He should've contacted his family (or at least his sister) to tell them he was ok. But maybe he didn't know how or what to say. And, if I was in his shoes, I would've probably struggled w/ that as well.

"I must express myself." - Delia Deetz

reply

[–] lordjames-1 11 years ago

I completely relate to Chris and went through a lot of the same struggles he did. In my 20's I did a lot of bumming around the world and intentionally put myself in a number of very dangerous situations. I could have easily never returned just like Chris. But, I did eventually find my way home. That was easily the best time of my life. Very few people get to experience that degree of freedom and immediacy. I consider myself extremely fortunate to have done so. Is it a way to live your entire life? I decided no. But, I do think everyone would benefit from trying it out when they are young and brave.

reply

[–] Jose_Accent_On_E 10 years ago

Excellent thread! I really appreciate the depth of thought and lack of insults - a breath of fresh air on IMDb.

Anyway, my take is that the distinction Chris made between independence and not was arbitrary, such as his interpretation of travel by means other than hitchhiking and train-hopping as "cheating".

A true "purist" and "aesthetic traveler" would have ridden his damn bicycle to Alaska before trotting off into the wilderness.

Now pardon moi whilst I adjust my derailleurs...

reply

[–] scottt-44876 9 years ago

Great post. I agree.

I do not think he felt he could contact his sister. He left his parents because they were abusive to each other and made the whole family apart of their fights and drama. He could not cope with this any longer he needed to break free and end this abusive relationship. He knew if he wrote his sister his parents would find out and find him. He needed to escape them. His parents were not good people at all. I do not think he owed them anything.
He was not being cruel. It was cruel of his parents to make their private personal matters a household affair. They were controlling of him to the point that he had to escape to have some freedom and sanity.

reply

[–] int_53185 9 years ago

Most people have no notion of what it's like to grow up in emotional turmoil. All you want to do is escape, get away. It's not about hurting your family. Your mind can get so "full" of thoughts and negative feelings that you feel that you will explode if you don't leave. It's sort of like a dam that is ready to burst after a long and sustained rain. He felt that his mind would burst if he didn't leave. He could no longer handle any additional negativity and stress.

reply

[–] woodstock1960 9 years ago

I understand.

"Ain't life grand!"

reply

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 6 years ago

In the sense that Chris wanted to venture off into nature, to be free, to escape society, and to explore the unknown...that part I can relate to. But I think there's one important moral to the story. It's important to remember that in his last moments, he died scared, sick, and alone. I thought the death scene was rather sad and eerie. Even though Chris wanted to be adventurous and independent, his lack of communication (or connection for the matter) with others was lacking, and in some sense, sent him down a self-inflicted lonely path. It was like a double-edged sword. On one hand, Chris had a fearless desire for adventure, and on the other hand, as far as human connections went, he couldn't see the bigger picture. Chris still could've been adventurous, and he still could've kept in touch with his family, and have friends all at the same time. He kept focusing on Alaska so much, that it seemed to prevent him from enjoying his overall life. He was always in a hurry. If that makes any sense...

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

I'm another one who totally understands the impulse to get away from society, from people, and to just immerse myself in the natural world. Human beings can be annoying or cruel, the fantasy of being free of them, of just being alone with the birds and trees is a natural and understandable impulse. The impulse to have adventures and test your limits is also natural and understandable, and every young person should take a great leap into the unknown!

However, I'm not stupid enough to go into the wilderness with no preparation, because I know what can happen if you fuck up in an unforgiving environment like Alaska. If I ever give into the impulse to go into the wilderness for real, it'll either make every effort to do it right like Robyn Davidson crossing the Outback on camels and emerging alive at her destination (see in the excellent Australian film "Tracks" [2013]), or I'll go with no intention of being returning alive.

reply

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 6 years ago

Agreed.

Preparedness is key when it comes to venturing off into the wild. Regardless how badly you want to be free and in nature, you always have to be prepared. Otherwise, you're just bound for trouble.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

And so is... location, location, location!

There are places in this world where you could get away with going unprepared into the wild, forgiving environments where you might be able to live long enough to find your way out once you realized what a fool you'd been to go there unprepared. Alaska is not one of these places. Screw up there, and you die.

reply

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 6 years ago

True. Location is another important factor. Chris overestimated himself with Alaska.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

Yeah. Cheryl Strayed acted like a complete idiot while hiking through California and Oregon, and lived to write a book and have Reese Witherspoon play her in the movie "Wild". You can get away with a certain amount of foolishness here on the west coast of the continental US, and if that boy had tried his wilderness trip in the Sierras or the Cascades there he might be alive today.

But the world is full of places that ain't having it, and including the Maine woods and the great deserts, and Alaska.

reply

[–] Jehosaphet (1063) 6 years ago

There's also a great show from the 50's, I believe...about a guy who goes off to live near a lake out in nowhere, Alaska. All by himself, with no other company than the local wildlife. He spent his time doing survival-related stuff, building a rock-chimney for his cabin, setting traps etc. Goddang that was some excellent, inspiring film, what came back from it.

But as far as Christopher McCandless goes, his sisters have verified that there was a lot of emotional and physical abuse at home. And from what I understand, the location he was found at was very close to a trail that could have led him out. There was actually a road in site...you could see a bridge from where he died.
In the movie, he poisons himself, but all indications actually point to him starving to death. And with how long it takes to starve to death and how painful it is...seems to me like Chris was pretty intent on staying put.

I mean, its hard to say for sure, but from everything I've heard, his location wasn't as remote as we've been led to believe...he had plenty of opportunity to walk out but...just didn't, for whatever reason.

My point being that maybe we shouldn't be so quick to judge as to how stupid...or selfish the guy was. I can see how its difficult not to be, but if you think about it, how much smarts does it really take to know beforehand that a trip to the Alaskan wilderness will likely not end well if you haven't brought sustenance. He didn't just go out there underprepared, he went out there with nothing, which I imagine would put his level of obliviousness on par with a toddler's. Its a little hard to swallow that this college graduate was really so dumb as to forget he needed to eat, you know?

Personally, I think its likely that he wanted to die....that he went out there to die.

reply

[–] Bigcat (259) 6 years ago

It was Dick Proenneke. He lived alone in the backwoods of Alaska from I think 1968 until 1998. Great documentary, its called Alone in the Wilderness.

reply

[–] Jehosaphet (1063) 6 years ago

Very nice, its been years since I've seen that, I'm going to check it out again. Thanks Big, yeah I definitely recommend that show if you're into that kind of wilderness escapism. So amazing.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

It's entirely possible that he wanted to die, but if that's what he wanted there are much quicker and easier methods. It's also possible that his judgement became impaired as he got weaker and sicker, and if he wanted to find help he didn't have enough brain cells working to manage it.

We'll never know.

reply