Summary Of ' Ellie Mcdonnell ' By F. Scott Fitzgerald

Both Henry David Thoreau and Christopher McCandless ventured out into the woods to get away from the dreariness of everyday society and to find themselves. Only one lived to tell the tale. What was the fatal flaw of the man who didn’t continue on? The only way to find this is to analyze the differences and similarities between the two. McCandless, while embracing some of the same values as Thoreau, was ultimately a different man. While they led very contrasting lives in very distant times, both McCandless and Thoreau sought a type of freedom that can only be achieved when immersed in nature. Thoreau’s entitlement and cozy cabin in the woods is a far cry from McCandless’s constant struggle during his expedition, however, certain parallels

F. Scott Fitzgerald is in many ways one of the most notable writers of the twentieth century. His prodigious literary voice and style provides remarkable insight into the lifestyles of the rich and famous, as well as himself. Exploring themes such as disillusionment, coming of age, and the corruption of the American Dream, Fitzgerald based most of his subject matter on his own despicable, tragic life experiences. Although he was thought to be the trumpeter of the Jazz Age, he never directly identified himself with it and was adverse to many of its manifestations.

These anecdotes serve as contrasts to Chris’ adventures. Many of the other individuals are described as foolish, arrogant, or mentally imbalanced. Krakauer makes it very obvious that he does not believe that their negative traits applied to McCandless in any way. At the end of the chapter he goes as far as to explicitly state, “... unlike Waterman, McCandless wasn’t mentally ill. And unlike McCunn, he didn’t go into the bush assuming someone would automatically appear to save his bacon before he came to grief. McCandless didn’t conform particularly well to the bush-casualty stereotype. Although he was rash, untutored in the ways of the backcountry, and incautious to the point of foolhardiness, he wasn’t incompetent—he wouldn’t have lasted 113 days if he were. And he wasn’t a nutcase, he wasn’t a sociopath, he wasn’t an outcast. McCandless was something else—although precisely what is hard to say. A pilgrim, perhaps.” (85) This is one of the most blatant statements of the author’s true thoughts on Christopher McCandless and for good reason. Krakauer has just expounded the stories of some of Alaska’s worst wilderness casualties and he wants it to be flawlessly clear that the purpose of these anecdotes is to delve into a discussion about how Chris wasn’t just a casualty or a rebel or a fool

Throughout the novel, Christopher McCandless’s character changed over time. Up to McCandless’s death, he wanted to live with the wild and to be away from civilization as far as possible. He changes his mind when he writes “HAPPINESS ONLY REAL WHEN SHARED” (189). His purpose of living in the wild is to live with freedom and do whatever he wishes to do. However, he realizes he was a “refuge in nature” (189) and intended to abandon his solitary life and rejoin the human community. It is assumed that McCandless died a preventable death because of his unpreparedness, but it is now undeniable that his adversity is what caused his mortality. “…McCandless simple had the misfortune to eat moldy seeds. An innocent mistake, it was nevertheless

McCandless was trapped in a society that created an illusion of his own fake happiness while he was looking to discover himself. He possessed a desperate need to find the true meaning that only he could answer. McCandless quotes “I'm going to paraphrase Thoreau here... rather than love, than money, than faith, than fame, than fairness... give me

Who were the Molly Maguires? Did they really exist? These are questions asked by many people today. Some historians wonder if the Molly Maguires really did bring their secret society from England to the United States, or if the incidents blamed on them were just random accidents on which officials needed to place a blame. We may never actually know...

Not only did Chris McCandless sacrifice so much for the future that he wanted, but he remained focus on his goal and he never ever regretted a minute of it. Even close to his death he was always smiling in the pictures he took and he never looked for a way out. He came into the wild and learned to be one with it. He respected it and learned from it all while staying at his peak of happiness. Chris McCandless’ did not necessarily have a bad life, but it was clear that he was not always happy. When he was truly happiest, he was alone. His disapproval of modern day society is evident throughout the book; “I told him ‘Man, you gotta have money to get along in this world’ but he wouldn’t take it” (46). He realized he needed to be separated from these people and live on his own. He decided to change his course for the future into an isolated lifestyle all without notice to the people that loved him. He was set up for a great life, but he ended it all to follow his dreams and fulfill his purpose. Not

Krakauer writes in Author's Note “He was an extremely intense young man and possessed a streak of stubborn idealism that did not mesh readily with modern existence, long captivated by the writing of Leo Tolstoy McCandless particularly admired how the great novelist had forsaken a life of wealth and privilege to wander among the destitute. By writing this, Krakauer is admitting to his ideas on which he tries to shed light on McCandless story instead of having negative remarks. He wants his readers to know that McCandless follows what he believes in which is to wander in nature and follow the ideas of transcendentalism, which he landed on a land that he was seeking for. Also, Krakauer's demonstration of McCandless and his ethical ideas are proven as Krakauer writes on page 106, “but Christopher Johnson McCandless came into the world with unusual gifts and a will not easily deflected from its trajectory.” This proves that McCandless has a complex personality, but most importantly the author knows and understands his kind of complexity, McCandless was a stubborn young man, who wants his way, but what sets him apart from others is that he did something that others did not have the courage to do and most importantly he would not let anyone deter

At the end of the chapter, McCandless tells the man to try living his life as simple as possible in order to find happiness. Hinting that McCandless could have felt a need to live a plain life in order to be content.

Chris McCandless: a man so infatuated with nature, he practically committed suicide to bring himself nearer to it. This extreme liking for nature, along with other ideals, makes up the core tenets of the transcendentalist philosophy. McCandless demonstrates other tenets of transcendentalism as well, most notably the supremacy of the individual, by detaching himself from the mammon of this world. Another way he shows the supremacy of the individual, by the belief that one should not conform to the usual policies of life, causes him great trouble in some cases. As well as the belief that the individual supersedes all else, McCandless received much of his inspiration from nature. Finally, always following what he believes correct, McCandless

McCandless exhibits the transcendental tenet of nonconformity in his actions throughout his journey. First, McCandless did not connect with society, because he hated that people were left to die. He believed in equality, a transcendental ideal, so when his car broke down on his road trip to Alaska “he abandoned it in the Arizona desert” (4). He then proceeded “to bury most of his worldly possessions in the parched earth of Detrital Wash and then ... burned his last remaining cash” (4). These acts signify that he refuses to be materialistic and conform to society standards, but he chooses to live by his own morals. Second, in the movie, McCandless visits a bar with his coworkers where he explains his dislike of society. He says, “Society, man! You

This is one reason why he decided to leave home; he wanted to experience the life of not having anything to his name, this is also shown through out the book during his journeys, however this not the only reason why he left home. The ultimate reason why he left home was because of what his father had done. A cab driver name Stuckey whom helped McCandless reach Alaska elaborated that McCandless said that he found out that his father was living a bigamist life and that it went against Chris’s beliefs (159). This was ultimately one of the reasons why Chris left home and had no feelings towards his parents. This exhibits the hatred and no remorseful attitude McCandless had through out the book towards his parents, especially his father. However, this attitude towards his father and civilization is justified completely when he decided to leave home and take on the wilderness.

McCandless’s arrogance is very evident throughout the book. Even as a child his father states that, “He didn’t think the odds applied to him. We were always trying to pull him back from the edge,” (page 109). This continued on with him to high school, where he explains that, “Chris was a high achiever in almost everything that caught his fancy….he brought home A’s with little effort. Only once did he receive a grade lower than a B: an F,”. For

A significant philosopher of the pre-Civil War era of the United States, Henry David Thoreau appeared to be above the standard with his philosophically driven life style. He wrote detailed accounts of his life in his book titled Walden, in which he expressed his desire to escape the confining pressures of human society. His second chapter lauded the concepts of individualism and self-sufficiency, yet he never took into account the potential harm of his mentality, for it could hurt individuals as well as communities, and modern life simply cannot support his ideals.

The chapter entitled “Conclusion” is a fitting and compelling final chapter to Thoreau’s Walden. Throughout Walden, Thoreau delves into his surroundings, the very specifics of nature, and what he was thinking about, without employing any metaphors and including none of his poignant aphorisms. However, placed among these at-times tedious sections, come spectacular and wholly enjoyable interludes of great and profound thought from a writer that has become extremely popular in modern America. His growth of popularity over such contemporary favorites as Emerson in our modern era stems from the fact that Thoreau calls for an “ideological revolution to simplification” in our lives. This