Rhetorical Analysis Into The Wild
Krakauer, in Into the Wild, adds his personal life to bring more awareness and understanding between the reader and Chris McCandless. By doing this, he connects himself to McCandless emotionally to attract more ethos, and pathos, to Chris’s story. In this paragraph, Krakauer uses his personal testimony with his father to further develop Chris’ story showing how the relationship affected his future through chronological development, and the disparity between him and his father. During the story of his father, Krakauer describes his dad’s love for micromanaging almost overshadows his love for his son, and shows this development in the chronological order of his childhood. Growing up, Krakauer shows the increase of control and manipulation his father asserts to ensure his children have a successful future. From “Christmas and birthdays I received such gifts as a microscope, chemistry set…,” and being expected to “excel in every class to win medals in science fairs” Krakauer’s life was
…show more content…
Krakauer uses the pathos gained through chronological order and the contrast resulting in father son tension is meant for the readers to better understand why Chris left and why he was so angry. Krakauer knows that the audience doesn’t get a personal appeal from Chris, since the audience doesn’t see Chris’s personal thoughts. Therefore, he supplemented his own to increase emotional appeals. Moreover, by convincing the audience that Krakauer’s actions were completely dictated by his father’s role, he implies that Chris’s actions were in direct result of his parent’s actions during his childhood. Although the audience doesn’t fully understand the reason for Chris’s adventure, it is evident that Krakauer, because of his personal life, is under the impression that the parental thumb on Chris’s life is exactly why he left into the
Krakauer uses the pathos gained through chronological order and the contrast resulting in father son tension is meant for the readers to better understand why Chris left and why he was so angry. Krakauer knows that the audience doesn’t get a personal appeal from Chris, since the audience doesn’t see Chris’s personal thoughts. Therefore, he supplemented his own to increase emotional appeals. Moreover, by convincing the audience that Krakauer’s actions were completely dictated by his father’s role, he implies that Chris’s actions were in direct result of his parent’s actions during his childhood. Although the audience doesn’t fully understand the reason for Chris’s adventure, it is evident that Krakauer, because of his personal life, is under the impression that the parental thumb on Chris’s life is exactly why he left into the