I want to do what Chris Mccandless did...sort of

eyedclaar

dunkman wrote:

i find what his motives for what he done to be admirable... i find his methods were arrogant... but the guys story is actually quite inspirational, at least his motivation for what he did is inspirational.

and your implying that some of us dont have the 'stones' to do what he did, but then i dont really fancy dying of starvation all alone on a deserted bus... i dont find that admirable.

But regardless of all of his failings, this thread has made me think about where to go this summer in the Scottish mountains

I'd like to see those Scottish mountains. Do you guys have any wildlife left over there, well, natural predators anyway? I don't mean to imply that a lot of folks lack the stones for a solo wilderness adventure, I mean to say that outright. However, just because I do, that doesn't mean I want to starve to death on some bus. I'm pretty sure that wasn't his goal either.

polaris_x

Cliffy6745 wrote:

15 years after the fact

what does it matter? ... if after all this time - she finally understood what he believed in - what does it matter if it was years after?

Cliffy6745

polaris_x wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

15 years after the fact

what does it matter? ... if after all this time - she finally understood what he believed in - what does it matter if it was years after?

I guess it doesn't and I don't think we need to go through this again and again, I probably shouldn't have responded and yeah it is great that she understands now, but I am sure she went through a world of pain at the time.

eyedclaar

polaris_x wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

15 years after the fact

what does it matter? ... if after all this time - she finally understood what he believed in - what does it matter if it was years after?

The genius of some people, artists and whatnot, is often times not appreciated until long after their death. Hmmm, maybe I should go starve on a bus tomorrow. That should get my legacy in gear.

IwasBit10

polaris_x wrote:

IwasBit10 wrote:

I think most people are criticizing the way he treated his family, or at least his sister because the movie seems to focus in on that. The book was very heart-breaking to read about how his mother reacted. For someone who's extremely tight with their immediate family, it's difficult for me to understand his motives when it comes to that.

Otherwise, I find what he did to be very inspirational.

again - as much as his sister worried about him ... she understood ...

That still doesn't justify it for me. So basically her (and her mother's) unhappiness is acceptable because it was making Chris happy?

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge McCandless fan and supporter. I first read the book ten years ago when I was in high school, and was obsessed with it. I love his appreciation for nature, his strong will, and his overall outlook on things. I just find his treatment of his family, particularly his mother and sister, to be inconsiderate. That's pretty much my only criticism of him. You asked why people criticize him and I gave you my opinion.

polaris_x

IwasBit10 wrote:

That still doesn't justify it for me. So basically her (and her mother's) unhappiness is acceptable because it was making Chris happy?

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge McCandless fan and supporter. I first read the book ten years ago when I was in high school, and was obsessed with it. I love his appreciation for nature, his strong will, and his overall outlook on things. I just find his treatment of his family, particularly his mother and sister, to be inconsiderate. That's pretty much my only criticism of him. You asked why people criticize him and I gave you my opinion.

justify what? ... he followed his own heart ... so, you don't like that his mother/sister were unhappy about it? ... so be it ... that's your prerogative to criticize ... but his sister has come to terms with it ... why the need to shit on the guy now?

polaris_x

eyedclaar wrote:

The genius of some people, artists and whatnot, is often times not appreciated until long after their death. Hmmm, maybe I should go starve on a bus tomorrow. That should get my legacy in gear.

i'll come by with some bison jerky and you'll crack ...

eyedclaar

Last time I say this, but we shouldn't live just to make our moms and sisters happy. Like I said, some people join the army in times of war and that rarely makes moms and sisters all that comfortable. Some cry themselves to sleep every night. However, what happens when a soldier dies. Do we attack their memory saying how selfish they were for following their heart and how much pain they caused their family? Why not? They didn't have to join the army. They chose to put themselves in harm's way, so why don't we bag on them for those decisions?

That's a rhetorical question, mind you.

eyedclaar

polaris_x wrote:

eyedclaar wrote:

The genius of some people, artists and whatnot, is often times not appreciated until long after their death. Hmmm, maybe I should go starve on a bus tomorrow. That should get my legacy in gear.

i'll come by with some bison jerky and you'll crack ...

Crack hell, I'll probably also eat the hand that feeds me. Is there anything better than soylent green when a man gets hungry?

norm

blackredyellow wrote:

To the OP, do what you want... but from reading your posts over the years, I'm not sure that this will be fulfilling for you either. Maybe it's to harsh, but it seems that nothing will live up to the level of romanticism that you seem to expect stuff to... If you want to see/experience the county, then do it, but it seems like you expect some sort of spiritual fulfillment in everything (a song, a movie, a book, etc), and besides a bunch of cool sights, and encounters, a year from now, you will be looking for something else to fill that void.

this will fall on deaf ears but it is the truth



as for chris, the selfish argument always makes me laugh...does one have to live one's life for other people or for themselves? if one wants to cut themselves off from their world, that is their choice...does it hurt the people he's cutoff? probably...but it's his choice, not yours

IwasBit10

polaris_x wrote:

justify what? ... he followed his own heart ... so, you don't like that his mother/sister were unhappy about it? ... so be it ... that's your prerogative to criticize ... but his sister has come to terms with it ... why the need to shit on the guy now?

Not shitting on him. Quite the opposite actually. I have so much respect for Chris that I guess I expected better of him in this particular circumstance. The guy was so smart and so self-aware, he knew the pain he was causing them. Guess I just wished he dropped them a line once or twice. To each their own.

dunkman

norm wrote:

blackredyellow wrote:

To the OP, do what you want... but from reading your posts over the years, I'm not sure that this will be fulfilling for you either. Maybe it's to harsh, but it seems that nothing will live up to the level of romanticism that you seem to expect stuff to... If you want to see/experience the county, then do it, but it seems like you expect some sort of spiritual fulfillment in everything (a song, a movie, a book, etc), and besides a bunch of cool sights, and encounters, a year from now, you will be looking for something else to fill that void.

this will fall on deaf ears but it is the truth



as for chris, the selfish argument always makes me laugh...does one have to live one's life for other people or for themselves? if one wants to cut themselves off from their world, that is their choice...does it hurt the people he's cutoff? probably...but it's his choice, not yours

glad it makes you laugh dude... you have to live your life for yourself... but does that preclude you from picking up a phone or writing a letter to a family member or friend.

i personally find it selfish that a loving brother would just vanish into thin air for however many months it was and not inform his loving sister... just as it would be selfish of me to pack a case tomorrow and go make nice huts with African tribesmen for the next 17 months and leave my wife and 2 wee girls at home crying at the sudden and tragic disappearance of their daddy. i personally believe that would make me a bit of a cunt.

decides2dream

eyedclaar wrote:

Last time I say this, but we shouldn't live just to make our moms and sisters happy. Like I said, some people join the army in times of war and that rarely makes moms and sisters all that comfortable. Some cry themselves to sleep every night. However, what happens when a soldier dies. Do we attack their memory saying how selfish they were for following their heart and how much pain they caused their family? Why not? They didn't have to join the army. They chose to put themselves in harm's way, so why don't we bag on them for those decisions?

That's a rhetorical question, mind you.

especially since in many wars, soldiers get drafted...not all volunteers. just sayin'.
(tho i know this war, yea...all volunteers...but don't get me started on the low levels of opportunity for some people and yada yada)

as to mccandless...i admire some parts of him...others annoy me....a lot of it i see as the hubris of youth and just being 'smarter than everyone else' as we all are in our teens and 20s.... he's definitely no hero to me tho, no doubt...but whatever. even amongst people who's ideas and work i admire, a lot of em were selfish pricks, or arrogant assholes...basically terrible people, and yet i still admire their work. doesn';t much matter to me. now people i admire for who they are as people...whole other story. bottomline, mccandless isn't important to me in any way, tho as i said.....there are admirable qualities and ideas there. and sure, i feel for his family but yes...we must all blaze our our trails. and i think it was you who mentioned, if he didn't die...we porbably wouldn't even know about him and i agree. usually how it goes eh? i'll happily go on living my life, and dying, and being forgotten quickly...and that's a-ok by me. i'll still do what i want and enjoy my life and the world will keep on going. cycle of life and all that BS.

dunkman wrote:

i personally find it selfish that a loving brother would just vanish into thin air for however many months it was and not inform his loving sister... just as it would be selfish of me to pack a case tomorrow and go make nice huts with African tribesmen for the next 17 months and leave my wife and 2 wee girls at home crying at the sudden and tragic disappearance of their daddy. i personally believe that would make me a bit of a cunt.

it IS selfish, no doubt.
however, it is ok to be selfish, even to be a bit of cunt as you say . i'm sure mccandless knew what he was doing, and what people might think...and he didn't care. maybe that makes him more selfish? or maybe...he just had different priorities than many of us. he was young, single, no responsibilities except to himself. if you're gonna go off into the wilderness and test yourself, best - and least selfish - time to do it.

blondieblue227

i agree norm!
i too wanted to say something about the void thing too so i will say it now.
don't blame chris either if you go off into the wild and your void is not filled. lol!
most of us humans having that nagging void feeling all our lives. it's a human trait or something.

and again...i have no idea why he didn't keep in contact with his sister. i feel he should have. i can only guess why he didn't is because he thought he was going to have the option of going back. he didn't go out there to die.
i wouldn't call his no contact selfish.
he was young and had no responibilities.
if he was older and had his own family, yes then i would say it was selfish.
it was thoughtless and cruel maybe not to call his sister.
but to use 'selfish' to me it's like you're trying to take away a person's free will. (just because you have a sister you should call her? uhhh no)

IwasBit10

eyedclaar wrote:

Last time I say this, but we shouldn't live just to make our moms and sisters happy. Like I said, some people join the army in times of war and that rarely makes moms and sisters all that comfortable. Some cry themselves to sleep every night. However, what happens when a soldier dies. Do we attack their memory saying how selfish they were for following their heart and how much pain they caused their family? Why not? They didn't have to join the army. They chose to put themselves in harm's way, so why don't we bag on them for those decisions?

That's a rhetorical question, mind you.

I totally agree with your first sentence. I'm not saying Chris should've been home for dinner every night and done the dishes afterwards. I'm just saying, you shouldn't have to inflict pain and force others to make sacrifices for your own happiness. Just reassure them that he was alive, that's all. Other than that, I have nothing bad to say.

decides2dream

blondieblue227 wrote:

i agree norm!
i too wanted to say something about the void thing too so i will say it now.
don't blame chris either if you go off into the wild and your void is not filled. lol!
most of us humans having that nagging void feeling all our lives. it's a human trait or something.

that made me laugh!


i love romanticism, love having lofty dreams...just day dreaming.
i've done a lot of things i've wanted in this world, some i haven't gotten to yet (oz!) some i may never...or i may decide i don't want to. we do change, our priorities can shift, we find a new path, whatever. i haven't done anything earth-shattering - tho some amazing things to me, but i know many of my choices and decisions others thought were out there, but yea....my life and all that. i think we all to some degree just feel the *potential* for......anything. that unknown, the what-ifs, etc. i think making peace with that, finding your happiness within yourself, not expecting it to simply be *created* by outside forces, some experience, some place, some people...but yourself.....that's it.

i think actually it was you? who recently said something about being happy with what you have. i fully agree. and that doesn't mean *settling*...or not challenging yourself, or not wanting *more*....just that in any time or space, YOU are the master of your own happiness. it's not always fireworks, but contentment and peace is pretty fucking amazing too.

Cliffy6745

dunkman wrote:

i personally find it selfish that a loving brother would just vanish into thin air for however many months it was and not inform his loving sister... .

Ahh, I like it. Using other Krakauer titles to make a point. I think you are onto something. Off hand I think this could be used quite a bit with his titles.

dunkman

norm wrote:

as for chris, the selfish argument always makes me laugh...does one have to live one's life for other people or for themselves? if one wants to cut themselves off from their world, that is their choice...does it hurt the people he's cutoff? probably...but it's his choice, not yours

ok on that point...

I guess its ok for an alcoholic dad who beats his wife up to be the way he is? I mean he's living his life for himself after all... does it hurt the people he's abusing? probably.. but its his choice, not yours.

Adjective

* S: (adj) selfish (concerned chiefly or only with yourself and your advantage to the exclusion of others)

he's the fucking dictionary definition... :thumbup:

IwasBit10

Cliffy6745 wrote:

dunkman wrote:

i personally find it selfish that a loving brother would just vanish into thin air for however many months it was and not inform his loving sister... .

Ahh, I like it. Using other Krakauer titles to make a point. I think you are onto something. Off hand I think this could be used quite a bit with his titles.

Hahaha. Just off the top of my head:

Chris had Eiger Dreams, but decided to fulfill those dreams in the Alaskan wilderness instead, A Place Where Men Win Glory. So he set off Into The Wild, only to vanish Into Thin Air and he now rests Under the Banner of Heaven.

Cliffy6745

IwasBit10 wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

dunkman wrote:

i personally find it selfish that a loving brother would just vanish into thin air for however many months it was and not inform his loving sister... .

Ahh, I like it. Using other Krakauer titles to make a point. I think you are onto something. Off hand I think this could be used quite a bit with his titles.

Hahaha. Just off the top of my head:

Chris had Eiger Dreams, but decided to fulfill those dreams in the Alaskan wilderness instead, A Place Where Men Win Glory. So he set off Into The Wild, only to vanish Into Thin Air and he now rests Under the Banner of Heaven.

Simply outstanding. I was thinking of something very similar.