Post: #26

(02-11-2017 05:38 AM)Luther Wrote:  I watched a documentary about him, didn't see the Sean penn movie or read the book. I took away a couple opinions from it.
First, he was stupid and naive and deserved to be destroyed by the wilderness. He managed to shoot a moose... if he spent Andy time preparing he should of learned how to preserve meat in the bush, by 'smoking/drying' it. There's a lot of meat on a moose.
Second, the documentary said that none of the fathers children are in contact with him anymore. Clearly they had a fucked up time as kids.

I guess you think it is fine to look at it from the human point of view, but I am getting tired of all the Anti-Moose rhetoric around here, not to mention the constant Moose Threads.

I suppose you also think that it is fine to have a chandelier that looks like this?



If we as a forum cannot come together and accept that the safety and well being of moose-kin as a priority, then what is the hope for the rest of society?

Can we please stop the casual savagery and come together on this one issue without locking antlers?

Post: #27

^ Please explain your position in depth. I have eaten a lot of moose but would be willing to give it up for the solidarity of this forum, and to amend with you of course. Panda tastes better anyway.

Post: #28

(02-11-2017 05:38 AM)Luther Wrote:  I watched a documentary about him, didn't see the Sean penn movie or read the book. I took away a couple opinions from it.

Second, the documentary said that none of the fathers children are in contact with him anymore. Clearly they had a fucked up time as kids.

haven't heard of this documentary, can you post a link?

as for his parents being in touch, well the kid died nearly 20 years ago. of course they are not in touch.

He did live with them through high school, and then attended an expensive private university and had his own car. His parents paid for those things. The family has been fairly private, but the relationship could not have been as estranged as suggested in the film; they were fully funding him through graduation. More likely, he separated himself from his parents, like he did from everyone else.

the fascinating thing about Candless is the question why did he do this. Blaming it on poor parenting is just too simplistic and probably false. Krakeur in his book tries to answer this question indirectly by telling the stories of others who did similar things.

Post: #29

I wrote that none of the fathers children are in contact with him anymore. Did you know that the father had two families simultaneously?

Post: #30

I watched the documentary on youtube. You can prob find it with a search.

Post: #31

(02-12-2017 12:58 PM)Luther Wrote:  I wrote that none of the fathers children are in contact with him anymore. Did you know that the father had two families simultaneously?

Yes. But he's been dead for nearly 20 years. no one has been in contact with him.

Candless is an interesting story but I don't think you can explain it by saying he had a poor family as the film maker does. He's also not someone who should be held up as a hero, because despite Sean Penn's attempts to make him honorable ultimately he was very selfish.

I don't see the point of his father not being in touch with him, despite financing his college years. Candless can't be held with responisbility either. Ultimately, Candless didn't say goodbye to either family, not his father, not his mother, not his sister, not his friends. He simply committed suicide in slow motion.

Post: #32

I have to add that the movie did an outstanding job with getting Eddie Vedder to create and record the soundtrack. This soundtrack is what gives this movie a different feel to the book, even though the story is pretty much the same.

Post: #33

Great discussion guys.

I too agree that the idea of introspection can only go so far until it is no longer beneficial and just leads to thinking in circles and wasting time.

I can't speak for everyone, but most things I do are far more enjoyable when shared with someone else. Even most personal projects where the process is very involved and engaging that I enjoy doing alone; the final product is something that I value more when I get to share it with others. Even doing something as simple and peaceful as sitting in nature quietly watching and listening brings me more personal enjoyment when I have someone to share the experience with. Someone to reflect on the moment with and bond with over the experience.

Post: #34

Amazing discussion and have made me really think a lot about what it means to seek isolation.

I agree, introspection and isolation are overrated. Back in 2013 when I was working in Japan I decided to spend my 12 day winter holiday in the backwoods of Okayama in central Japan. It had been a rough year and part of me was spiteful for failed relationships and professional jealousy at work.

At the same time I knew my grandmother's health was rapidly declining in home country but I willfully removed myself from her situation and instead beelined for the remote woods of Okayama.

My situation was nowhere near as crazy as McCandless as I was living in a traditional style Japanese wooden house with gas heaters, oven, and water. But I had to bring all food and make my way to the lodge after paying the old lady in the nearby town. But for 11 days I was in a very high altitude remote lodge cutoff from society.

I spent everyday hiking in the mountains and reading my kindle (only technology I brought). But after about 2 days I thought I was going crazy. The woods were terrifying but less so than staying indoors all day. I was cooking the same meal everyday and I wasn't able to write anything because my mind couldn't focus from the isolation. The only thing I could do was binge read cheap thriller fiction -- the deep stuff I had on my kindle was too much.

I finally started to understand Japanese folkore and myth's obsession with demons. The high dense mountains of Japan are terrifying in their jungle like alien features. They are extremely forbidding to travel through with very steep climbs and twisted growth that blocks and breaks most ankles and legs. Water is scarce and can only be found in deep gorges between sections of mountains. Going down into these areas for water may well take half the day! When you reach a peak you realize the sheer terror of these rolling thick jungle mountains that stretch like the sea. Despite its variation (unlike the sea) it's just as empty, lonely, and cruel.

When I was on the bullet train back to Tokyo at the end of this trip it felt amazing to have a conversation with a Australian couple. They weren't particularly amazing people, nice enough, but having people to talk to and a world to explore that's inhabited by others and occupied with human things is essential. Yes periods of isolation is nice to focus and recover from draining social and professional situations but total isolation is not for me.

Post: #35

(02-22-2017 01:45 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  I can't speak for everyone, but most things I do are far more enjoyable when shared with someone else. Even most personal projects where the process is very involved and engaging that I enjoy doing alone; the final product is something that I value more when I get to share it with others. Even doing something as simple and peaceful as sitting in nature quietly watching and listening brings me more personal enjoyment when I have someone to share the experience with. Someone to reflect on the moment with and bond with over the experience.

I've been aware of game since I was 18, I think. I'm 25 now.

While at the start I could only think about banging girls, there's always been a hum on the back of my ear telling me that it wasn't really what I'm about.

As I get older the hum is becoming louder and I've been realizing that I'm probably more relationship based, even though I enjoy very independent partners, since I'm independent myself.

Some guys here are all too defensive to let anyone into their lifes. I'm defensive too, but the only way to build something with someone else and get that fulfilment you talk about is to allow yourself to be vulnerable.

I'm very picky about girls I bang, and even more about girls I date - but I do let the door open for them to wow me.

It's said that reaching what is known as "flow state" - be that working, playing sports, performing or whatever may be the case - is the closest thing to happiness and completeness that one can have, and I do agree to an extent.

But most of my fondest memories are moments I shared with friends, family or girls. Flow was present; but the connection was the real key. Messing around with buddies at the beach, going to a rave in the woods and dancing all night, banging my girlfriend as the sun crept in after a New Year's Party. I almost get a tear of joy thinking about it.

There's guys on the game forum that say you shouldn't date if you don't intend to get married. "You shouldn't waste your time", "you shouldn't waste girls' time", and so on. Damn, so guys are supposed to reach marriage-level maturity without ever having long term relationships?

Learning to deal with other humans through thick and thin made me mature so much - and have some of the greatest experiences while doing it.

Personally I don't see the point in tons and tons of one night stands. Even when I get one, I'm always probing to see if things could possibly go further. It's not something I seek actively, but like I wrote here, I'm always observing how girls act.

Maybe I'm addicted to finding that true feeling of connection. It's a rare feeling indeed.

I wasn't always like that though.

I've always been pretty zen and calm and imperturbable. The con to those attributes is that I missed out on a lot because I rarely, if ever, GAVE myself to moments and people.

I met a chick in Switzerland back in 2012 who had the most profound effect on me. She'd grab my head and made me stare at her baby blue eyes and say softly and motherly: "You have to open up. Open up to me. Let me in." I was entranced. It was a great time because I did manage to allow her in. What followed was a deep, sharp heartbreak - but the lesson stuck with me.

One thing I'll say is I learned a lot about being open to give and receive love from the book I mentioned in the previous post - Siddharta, by Hermann Hesse.

Stalin - if you haven't read it, I'd highly recommend picking it up.

In the book, the figure of the river can be interpreted as one's life. The flow of the river represents time.

Each moment the river is still the river, but the water is never the same.

Rivers, like one's life, can run paralell to other rivers. Sometimes they meet and create a great, strong current - only to eventually separate again.

The river gives what it has but it keeps on keeping on. The river is indifferent to what comes to it. Not negatively - but it's just above worry, so it's free to do it's own thing.

It takes other rivers in without worry and if it divides into two rivers, there's no hard feelings or remorse - things are as simple as they are.

That zen, stoic, open approach has been creating so much value in my life for the last few years.

Things, people, moments - whatever comes, you welcome it.

Post: #36

With regards to the original theme of GS's post:

It's been a while since I have read the book, but I saw the movie more recently. One thing that happens in the movie that is easy to miss is when he gets to Alaska, he sees a plane fly over his head.

The book makes a much more impressionable moment in time to understand Chris' potential thought process when he sees that- which ties into the question about the need for intimacy, friendship, and family.

His goal was to be somewhere, completey alone to find out what that's like. The plane represents civilization, he hadn't gone far enough yet. This explains why he wasn't more prepared, and was fooled by the plant life that is assumed to be his demise. He didn't think it through because he didn't know how far he would need to go. That said, the passion to reach solidarity clouded his judgement and he got what was coming to him based on poor planning and wilderness preparation.

The worst part is that he didn't find out what he needed in life- the people you care about and those that care about you- until it was too late.

The book is worth the read, and makes you think, no matter how true some the details may or may not have been. The movie is ok, it does have a great soundtrack.

Post: #37

(02-23-2017 08:16 PM)Gustavus Adolphus Wrote:  The book is worth the read, and makes you think, no matter how true some the details may or may not have been.

you say that as if the book is less reliable than the movie, when in fact in the ending credits the film maker admits that the family relationship was fictionalized.

I can't vouch for the book because I wasn't there but Krakauer wasn't trying to fictionalize it; he found the truth sufficiently compelling. Of course, Krakauer has been known to exaggerate, but most of the facts in his telling are verifiable.

Post: #38

Self-actualization is a pretty big problem for me right now, so the story resonates with me. I'm young, pretty good career with no debt, but the thought of clocking in and out to a cubicle, swiping right on the apps, fucking women without meaning, all makes me question my purpose in this world. What am I here for? To pump out a future generation of degenerate wage-slaves?

Post: #39

(02-23-2017 08:34 PM)Hypno Wrote:  

(02-23-2017 08:16 PM)Gustavus Adolphus Wrote:  The book is worth the read, and makes you think, no matter how true some the details may or may not have been.

you say that as if the book is less reliable than the movie, when in fact in the ending credits the film maker admits that the family relationship was fictionalized.

I can't vouch for the book because I wasn't there but Krakauer wasn't trying to fictionalize it; he found the truth sufficiently compelling. Of course, Krakauer has been known to exaggerate, but most of the facts in his telling are verifiable.

That's not what I am saying at all. I'm sure he did his very best to author it truthfully, but there are just some things that cannot be known. It is definitely more reliable than the movie.

I was merely pointing out that the substance makes you think and is a worthwhile and enjoyable read.

Post: #40

There are two forces at play here:

-- The freedom of taking action purely based on desire and intuition without regard (maybe even specifically against) cultural expectations and society.

Vs.

-- Taking a careful and pragmatic approach to a dramatic life decision with unpredictable consequences.

It's easy to dismiss McCandless because of his failure and death but his motivation was pure. His motivation and decision to seek the wild stands outside the consequences, and I think that's why people respect him regardless of what happened in the end.