- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 29,622
- Location
- Out of Bounds
It has seem weird to me the shear amount of interest in the guy who seems as misguided as that missionary who tried to canoe to one of the the last remote tribes and got killed. But what elements if the story make him an ideal to some and not the passionate preacher? The attempt to live outside of society's bounds? The fact that he died?
Interesting question ...
Off hand, I'd say the difference derives from the contexts in which each person (however misguidedly or unwisely) pursued his personal quest.
McCandless set off to risk himself (and himself alone) in pursuit of his own personal objective (fulfillment; isolation; whatever ... ). He did so by trekking off into the wide open spaces. Neither his objective(s) nor his actions intruded on anyone else. McCandless offered himself up to fate to see whether he could survive. He couldn't, but he gets credit for having tried.
Chau, on the other hand, set off to risk himself and others (via illegal actions and possible infection) in pursuit of an objective that involved acceptance, if not compliance, by others - in this case an indigenous group that had made it clear they would tolerate no visits, much less any intrusions on their beliefs or allegiances. Chau offered himself up to fate to see whether he could influence others who clearly didn't wish to be influenced.
McCandless was conducting an experiment in personal development. Chau was pulling a stunt aimed at miraculously imposing his belief system on an obviously unwilling audience.