What is the irony of Jack London into the wild?

Answer 1

jack London didn't write into the wild, Jon Krakhauser did.

Answer 2

There are a number of ways to look at that idea in this superb short story - this is just mine:

The irony in the story is that the man is clueless about what he is getting into. He has attained "a little knowledge" of what it's like to be where he is. And "a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing", as the old saying goes. That is his eventual undoing. Every stumbling block in the road makes it more difficult for the man to accomplish his goal of reaching the "destination" by nightfall. Some of the time, he thinks correctly (a "little knowledge"), but as time goes on, he makes more and more foolish moves (a "dangerous thing"). Eventually, the wilderness kills him, fueled by his own false confidence in "a little knowledge".

Answer 3

Jack London was a major influence on Chris McCandless, the protagonist of "Into the Wild," yet McCandless's journey ultimately ends in tragedy despite London's romantic ideas of wilderness and self-reliance. The irony lies in McCandless's attempt to embody London's adventurous spirit and quest for meaning in nature, only to face a lonely and fatal outcome that challenges London's glorification of the wilderness.

Answer 4

It is ironic that the main character decided not to kill the ginger bearded man, and this man ended up killing him.