Regarding the discussion that we had in class today dealing with story telling and whether or not a person has the authority to put an evocative analysis on another individual’s story, I could not help but to think of Jon Krakauer’s twist on McCandless’s travels in “Into the Wild”. Interestingly, in order for us to fully analyze the story of Chris McCandless, we as the readers must believe that Krakauer is a reliable source. Although he is a well-known author – “Into the Wild” became a national best seller! – I never thought to question whether or not we can believe that Krakauer’s account of McCandless’ wanderings and eventual death is complete truth. As human beings we cannot help but put our own twist on stories we hear, simply because we have perspectives, imaginations and a mind that enables us to see every situation slightly different from another person. When we were sharing our own stories as a class, I could not help but wonder how different each person’s version of even one of the stories would be, had we continued to pass it on and tell it to someone else. Without a doubt there would be some discrepancy regarding the people involved, the chronology, or details in the setting that we would forget or even add in, depending on our experiences. Krakauer then, probably cannot help but to add in his own story in juxtapostion with McCandless’ own story and it is probably for the better that he brings in his own separate experience. By mentioning his own story separately, but within the story of McCandless, Krakauer is able to distinguish between the two distinct tales and therefore not confuse the details of McCandless’ story with his own. This in turn makes Krakauer a more reliable story teller and the reader can enjoy “Into the Wild” without constantly wondering if what the author says happened is fact.