Through journal entries, highlighted passages, stories of people's encounters, and personal experiences, author Jon Krakauer attempts to reconstruct the life of a young transcendentalist man named Chris Johnson McCandless in the biographical novel Into the Wild. McCandless was a young man of 24 years old who completely severed his connection to the world, his family, and all his material possessions in hopes of surviving off the land of Alaska. In the two years leading up to his Alaskan Odyssey, McCandless created a new life for himself and lived under the name Alexander Supertramp, hoping to leave his old life behind. Krakauer begins his novel “Into the Wild” by bluntly revealing to the audience that he had only survived 113 days and that his remains were found two weeks after his death. Instead of focusing on McCandless's death, Krakauer focused on his life. Although Krakauer is biased, he proves himself to be a credible biographer and proves the claims made in the author's note. Krakauer's bias soon becomes clear, and many people criticize him for it. Contrary to what you might think, Krakauer's bias gives him credibility because he openly admits it in his author's note. He states: “I do not pretend to be an impartial biographer. McCandless's strange tale had a personal note that made an impartial portrayal of the tragedy impossible.” (Author's note). Krakauer warns us from the beginning that he will also include his contribution to Chris' story because of his experience with a similar event. However, he doesn't do this to shed light on himself, but rather to give the reader insight into Chris's experience. “ But the reader be warned: I interrupt McCandless's story with fragments of a story taken from myself... half of the paper ......ds contains a neurotoxin that can cause paralysis, probably would have emerged from nature at the end of August without any greater difficulty than when he went out into the wild in April, and would still be alive today."(194) Krakauer believes that the reason he couldn't get out was because of his little mistake An argument can be made about Krakauer's reference to one's life does not accurately reflect Chris's, but just like many cases in the world have made assumptions in relation to others and found answers It will never be known exactly what happened since Chris is no longer alive to tell the tale, but this is as good as it gets. Even though Krakauer was biased and twisted the story to favor Chris McCandless, he proves himself to be a credible author. He proves his claims about Chris and gains credibility by admitting his biases and gathering first-hand information.