Animal Bombs
We were listening to the Iron and Wine session from the NPR link http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18351988. We were all quite anguished over tomorrow's forecast and fantasizing about laying the best bet. That was my excuse anyway. I'd been working through the beginning of the Magic Mountain by Thomas Mann, and some of Hans Castorp's little forgotten complexes bestowed upon him by an isolated mountain time tie in so presciently to my other reads lately: Cortazar, Los Perseguidores; Felisberto Hernandez, The Daisy Dolls; Mutis, The Snow of the Admiral. We just saw the Into the Wild movie adaptation also which left me with the impression that the dissection of this confused kids' disconnection leaves a slightly exploitative taste. McCandless' borderline irrationality and rigorous adherence to his self-defined 'strict moral standards seems to be touched on as some sort of rare or mythical occurence, when, even from Krakauer's generous treatment of his odyssey, it is strikes one undeniably that this young man was both quite gifted and quite dangerously overconfident in both his ideals and his earnest belief that he could inhabit them as a consequence of his ideals and beliefs, not through the rigorous, cautious trial and error process that informs the abilities of authentic survivalists. The ill-defined, materialistic, self-obsessed society that Alex Supertramp so reviles is obviously a deeply-ingrained part of himself that he fears as some kind of plague. The Oxfam donation--so dramatic and seemingly noble--cannot but be viewed as some sort of get out of jail free card justifying an individualists' quest. There is no final judgement for Chris. What if he had made it out of the wild and gone on to be a great human rights crusader; a genuine and authentic advocate for freedom and justice and truth? He deprived us of this answer just as much he took it from himself by taking on a dichotomy as a doctrine: modern society and its ills vs. truth and freedom definable only by the individual. I have heard it said that uncompromising people are easily admired and that well-reasoned compromise has been justified by history. This I do not believe, for there are numerous counter examples, not to mention that history's greatest shifts have pivoted upon unwavering principles disguised as compromise, and history's most infamous judgements heaped upon those who have toyed with history's concept as a reflection of their legacy instead of as a direct result.



