The first way would include a logical perspective and analysis of McCandless's actions - viewing it as an ill-mannered move and an idea of ​​freedom and exploration through experiences of a young man. . The notion of a typical “wild child” could be brought up and argued as a defense to explain his actions. However, the idea that McCandless went into the wilderness to serve as an indirect commentary on society and what it represents serves as a counterbalance to this perspective. This second way would include a spiritual perspective/commentary of freedom - instead of a logical perspective. McCandless denounces and rejects what he considers materials - money, objects, etc. : he chooses instead to move away into the real world, before civilization, construction, culture. He goes to the desert, gains new experiences and meets new people. The connecting point in both perspectives of freedom would be the desire to obtain such an untouchable concept – in its purest form. Intact and intact, no matter how logical or illogical it may seem