What you say or think can not always be perceived as significant if it isn’t explained correctly. When an author crafts an idea out of words he uses rhetorical tools to convince the readers that his ideas are Important and that they should continue reading. Jon Krakauer strategically strung his story together in a certain manner for the same reason. He presents his stories in a chronological order, appealing every idea to either logos, pathos or ethos in order to make all of McCandless’s relationships and adventures relatable to all audiences. Krakauer appeals to ethos by creating qualifications for certain adventurers in order to compare to Chris McCandless. He also indirectly told us that he had, as well as the several other men being compared, fit the qualifications and compared himself and his adventures to Chris’s. He tells us about how he also was said to be self absorbed, reckless and irritable. Krakauer reveals his credibility by speaking of the time when he once made the trip to Alaska too and climbed The Devils Thumb thinking by the end of his trek he would have solved all of his problems. Although like McCandless he had solved nothing and was accomplishing nothing in Alaska. Another unusual problem that Krakauer seemed to share with Chris was their disappointed fathers. They both seemed to end up running from the father authority that they once craved but couldn’t ever seem to please. Krakauer proved that his analysis on McCandless’s life is reliable because of his mindset and past experiences. Krakauer used logic in order to justify Chris’s compassionate side and also his somewhat mindless side. Eric Hathaway explained to us that Chris rarely went to any of the parties like a normal college student but instead wandered the streets talking to prostitutes and the homeless, buying them meals and genuinely telling that how they can improve their life. This exposes his caring and nurturing side that really allows