Sunday, September 18, 2016

Into Thin Air #2

The voice of this Author (Jon Krakauer) is a very stern, serious and intent. The way he wrote this story is never joking or being sarcastic. He's setting the mood that is mellow yet intense. The details make you get really into exactly what was happening. That causes the beginning of the book project a weariness of an upcoming disaster. When it's only 5 chapters in and he is already mentioning that most of the group is having trouble functioning. That alone already spells trouble. To top it off someone from the group falls and has to be helicoptered off the mountain. He also gets very technical. I mentioned before that there were a lot of details but the kinds of details are a big variety. There is imagery. Ex. "speckled the boulder-strewn ice". But there is also lost of details like exact dates, times and expenses. Those details really paint how much planning and preparing it takes to even get to some of the lower base camps. It makes you think about every little detail that had to be put in place at the right time. He remembers so much about the beginning of the expedition. Without that detail it would have been much harder to set the tone. Every person he describes is important but there seems to be a lot of people that were vaguely described and very briefly. It's hard to keep track of who is where and how he knows them. There is so much skipping around that the stories are getting mixed up. May be the author wanted you to connect all the stories towards the end. Maybe there is a message that connects everything together at the end. I really hope things get a little more clear. It's like he is talking to us about what happened but takes a brake every few minutes and has someone else talk for a while then comes back and starts somewhere slightly different.

4 comments:

  1. I understand were you are coming from with the idea that he jumps around when he talks/writes but I feel like this info is going to be need in the future. And also if it were me writing this it would be so much shorter, it might be filler info so that is a book not a magazine article. The stern voice and dates /details might be vital to get to the peak like remembering what your path looked like and what day is your turn to go up to the peak.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey girl, I'm reading the same book (as you know) and I agree so hard. One part of me thinks that the stern, hard tone of his voice as a writer is a really good addition to the mood of the book but at the same time I find it almost boring. As I'm reading I imagine it as if read in a monotone voice which makes the book hard to enjoy. I think some of his writing is unneeded and just adds to the boringness of it ESPECIALLY THE SKIPPING AROUND TO THE PAST TO THE PRESENT. Like can you not, it's very confusing and I find it unnecessary and annoying. I couldn't agree more. I don't know if they will all connect I think he's just a very sloppy writer as he may not be experienced in the field of language arts ??? Honestly because of all the skipping and unclear writing I have not enjoyed the book thus far and find it really boring. The voice is not a nice voice and I think this book is a waste of time (but that's just me) swag ya later !!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I totally agree with you on Krakauer's voice. I'm reading the same book and honestly the amount of detail put into the memoir is impressive yet horribly boring. Kudos to Krakauer for having such a good memory and vivid writing, but he could definitely add some humor. Instead of sounding like a memoir, it sounds like a textbook.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You mention how Krakauer structures his memoir:
    "It's like he is talking to us about what happened but takes a brake every few minutes and has someone else talk for a while then comes back and starts somewhere slightly different."
    How does this structure impact your reading experience? Is this a structure you might employ when you write your memoir? Why or why not?

    ReplyDelete