1. I believe Chris thought at first that he was plenty prepared to get by on the bare minimum, especially after his adventure in Mexico, where he survived for weeks on a few pounds of rice and whatever he could pull out of the ocean. I think Chris may have finally realized he was unprepared when he was nearing the end, starving because he was running out of food and couldn't catch or gather any easily, injured and with no means of contacting any help. I am willing to bet he was perfectly confident and in the state of mind that he was "plenty prepared, and ready to tackle anything the wilderness could throw at him" until he got injured. We don't know yet how he injured himself, but I bet that he was not expecting to become injured. He may have been expecting trouble, but he was probably not expecting to actually become injured by anything, as it has indicated that he is fearless, and thinks he's completely immune to any sort of injury or bodily harm.
So, I don't think he trekked into the wilderness expecting to die. I think the possibility may have been floating around in his mind, but he was not expecting it. I think he just wanted to live out in nature, and survive it, like Jack London, or Jules Vern, two authors he admired.
2. I think it was a good decision, to give away the ending at the very beginning. Most people who pick up a book just to maybe flip through the first few pages do not want to read a whole book that's just outlining the life of a person up until the time they died. If the book just starts out with facts, such as "Person A was born on xx-xx-xx, and he did such and such in his life because of this reason". No one wants to sit there and read that. But the way Jon Krakauer approached it was a much more gripping method. By starting out the book saying that a young man trekked out into the wilderness to do such and such, but within four lines goes to say that they found his decomposed body, people will immediately want to know why, and how, and when, and where, and all that sort of thing. But as most people know, you cannot just flip to the end of a story and instantly know everything about the story. In order to actually understand the motive behind any actions, you have to read a text in order to gather all the information. Which is what most people will do when they learn that the main character dies in the end. Of course, then there are those people who will just think "He dies? Well, I know how it ends", and toss the book away without giving it a second thought. But that's not most people, especially with a book like this, that foreshadows so much from the very get-go.
I believe the author’s purpose in doing this was to grab readers, and pull them in, so they would find the book more interesting. And it does give the readers insight on what may happen during the course of the novel than if it had started many other ways.
3. My initial reaction was "He finally came to his senses and realized he needs help!" It also makes me really begin to wonder: what could have happened to him that, after all the brushing off he's done to people, he's finally asking, pleading, almost, for help. From anyone. But then, a few sentences in, after saying he's injured and too weak to hike out of there, he starts going on about how he's out collecting berries and will return. And I'm just like "wait...what?" He needs to stop contradicting himself. he hates people, then he wants help. He's injured and weak, no, wait, I'm out collecting berries! I mean, really, he could be a little less fickle. A note like that does make me feel somewhat sympathetic for him, though I still think it was a rather stupid move in the first place.
