An Analysis Of Impartiality By Jon Krakauer

3. Krakauer argues in Chapter 14 that McCandless’s death was unplanned and was a terrible accident (134). Does the book so far support that position? Do you agree with Krakauer? Why or why not?

“The story is told through the photographs, and so what may appear to be autobiographical is not always so. On the other hand, many of the events are completely fictional, although they may be true in a historical context. For some of these events, there are photographs; for others, the image is a collage; and in all cases, the result is entirely of my doing. So although it may appear that these stories are my family’s, they are not precisely, and yet they are. (xi)”

By comparing Krakauer’s own life experiences and other peoples too to McCandless, he gave a little perspective and demonstrated that the negative remarks of many people were not correct for someone else had performed the same thing. Krakauer compared his youth mistakes

To say that Krakauer does have a bias towards McCandless is a rather obvious statement and something known to the reader from the author’s note. “My convictions should be apparent soon enough, but I will leave it to the reader to form his or her own opinion.” Yet despite a personal bias Krakauer has towards McCandless he keeps his promise to the reader and serves as an impartial enough biographer to allow the reader to form their own opinions. By interviewing both those who knew Chris or Alexander Supertramp on his journey to the last frontier and Alaskan locals, Krakauer steps to the side and lets others give their thoughts or memories as well as criticisms of the man who met his fate in the Alaskan wilderness. Krakauer does interfere with Chris/Alex’s story at one point in order

My reflective thoughts on Donald Murray's "All writing is Autobiography", are easily aligned with this work as it continuously offered textual examples to the reader from fiction and non-fictional viewpoints, as to the fundamental notion that all writing is autobiography. Murray without a doubt creates an argument about the affect a person's experience shape the outcome of any work a writer may produce, in which I agree. For example, Donald Murray's poem "Black Ice" is written with an autobiographical voice, although most details did not take place-- he admits, but the poem continued to bring forth an organic rhythm of story telling without any hints of small truths while Murray injects the extra influencing details. Murray

Composers of texts present a biased attitude to the events, personalities or situations represented. In various texts such as Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar” and Leunig’s cartoon “Yet another picture with the wrong caption”, the composers bias is evident even though conflicting perspectives towards the personality are presented.

Throughout time, there will continue to be a considerable divorce between academic and popular historians. As Margaret Conrad argues, popular historians have established the tension, by recreating “historical films without the involvement of trained historians”. This underscores the troubling gulf that sometimes separates public academics approaches to the past. Academic historians have been “too long focused” on professionalism, and discarded “generating” a “dialogue” (Conrad) with their contextual audiences. The substantial dissolution between academic and popular historians is evident in a range of sources, essentially from Michelle Arrows to Herodotus and Thucydides to Bury.

When reading literature we often attempt to use particular threads of thought or lenses of critique to gain entry into the implied historic or legendary nature of literature. To accurately process a tale in the light in which it is presented, we have to consider the text from multiple viewpoints. We must take into consideration intentional and affective fallacies and the socioeconomic circumstances of the presenter/author/narrator. We also have to consider how our personal experience creates bias by placing the elements of the story into the web of relationships that we use to interpret the external world. There also is the need to factor in other external pressures, from societal norms, cultural ideals, and psychological themes, and how

The Lewinsky Scandal… A perfect example as to why we cannot accept everything at face value before carefully examining it first. Everyone thought President Clinton was behaving himself in the White House, but, as it turns out, he was most definitely not. This can be the same for history. We must carefully consider different aspects of articles so that we do no make the mistake of believing everything we read. In order to fully understand an article, we must understand the author that wrote it. It is necessary to examine prejudices, sources, information left out, and missing background information before accepting an article. This method of critical analysis allows us to better understand the article

5. a.) Revisionism that stresses the faults of great figures can lead to an overwhelming negativity toward some great heroes who ultimately bring lessons of morality to the table. It perpetuates the idea that human beings, even the best of us, are always crawling with gaping character flaws. But, it also helps us humanize these great figures whose reputations often run away with them. It helps us to remember that political success does not equal morality. b.) This trend in historical writing alludes to a growing sense of both negativity and revolution in our society. As we begin to reject common figures of greatness and replace them with our own versions, modern-day youth culture is beginning to establish their own identity separate from current systems. This straying from the norm of decided importance implies a lack of trust or satisfaction with current

One might say it is more important for a biography to be impartial and others might say it is more important to be inspiring. I say it is more important for a biography to be inspiring. The three reasons a biography should be more inspiring rather than impartial is one, that people like to read books that inspire them, two, that by reading an inspiring biography about someone it might change their perspective, and three, is that it makes people feel good.

A biography is defined as a written account of another person 's life. The key word in the definition being another person’s life. Biographies are full of great information that can often times make history fun and exciting. Historical phenomenon is often portrayed through biographies allowing us to see how society has developed over time and how the past and present may be similar. Although biographies are full of information often times it is impossible to prove them to be true because they aren’t written by the person themselves. Linda Colley’s The ordeal of Elizabeth Marsh is a great example of an exciting biography that allows us to learn about British Imperial Rule through someone else’s eyes.

Knowing about the writer of a literary text can shape significantly the way that it is read. Consider the effect of the writer’s context on your understanding of The Lost Honour of Katharina Blum.

they cannot be considered valid due to the bias opinions of the writer. As historians many find this

A style of journalism that does away with the ‘oppression’ of objectivity that traditional journalism demands and in the process raises the question of whether any piece of reporting can ever be truly objective. Whenever the name of Hunter Thompson is evoked the focus automatically falls on the drugs, the guns, the constant and diverse forms of substance abuse [and Johnny Depp] but should we choose to swim through the psychedelic haze that surrounds Thompson we find a spirited, innovative writer whose accounts of his times with the outlawed Hell's Angels or Richard Nixon is compelling because of his vivid prose more than anything else. As he once famously declared in an interview "Objective Journalism is one of the main reasons American Politics has been corrupt for so long. You can't be objective about Nixon."