Sunday, March 7, 2021

Characters (p72-147)

     Having read about half of the book now, it would seem that the only two main characters in this book are the man and the boy, both of which have not been given a name, at least at this point in the book. We learn briefly about the wife of the man/the mother of the son when there are a few flashbacks. However, there weren't any about this woman in this quarter of the book, but she may come up later as we learn more about the boy's and the man's past.

    We aren't told much, if anything, about the man's past, but since the book seems to be more from his point of view, we are able to know a bit more about what is going on in his head. As I said before, I believe the book is a reflection of the man's thoughts which is why the book seems a bit rushed through the lack of quotation marks, and there are no chapters because his mind never rests.

    Primarily, this man shows a devotion to his son while doing his best to keep them both alive. His son is the last thing to hold onto, the thing that seems to keep him going. When he wants to give up, the thought of himself dying isn't the thing that keeps him going. It's the thought of something terrible happening to his son. I think this love for his son strengthened after his wife committed suicide. He is traumatized to the point where he fears that his son might meet a similar fate if he were to become as hopeless as she had become.

    The longer they survive, they come across more horrible sights that frighten the boy to his core. One being a trapdoor that contains a bunch of people, stored away by the "bad guys" as a source of food. When the man and the boy discover it, the people beg them for help, but the risk was far too great. Terrified for both of their lives, the man "dropped the lighter... pushed the boy up the stairs... grabbed the boy by the hand," and made a run for it (111). Instances like this show how devoted he is to his son, getting them both out as soon as possible to protect him.

    However, there was a time when he considered leaving the boy, even after all they had been through. It was soon after they were almost found by "the bad guys" since the man thought he could survive on his own. Despite considering abandoning his son, he planned on leaving him the pistol, so that he could at least kill himself rather than be eaten alive or worse when found (113). This shows that even someone as devoted as the man would consider saving himself over the boy when in extreme circumstances.

    The man decides against leaving him, once his boy's look of terror snaps him back to what matters the most, and that is trying to keep his son alive and doing whatever he can to protect him. It is possible that he will be tempted to leave again later in the book if things get bad enough, but I don't think he ever will. The innocence of the boy makes it too terrible to leave him to the evil of this new world that they are currently living in.

    The boy also loves his father in return but in a different way. The man partly loves the boy since it gives him a reason to not give up and in some way is his connection to life before the apocalypse. But the boy was born right after whatever it was that happened, so this is the only life he knows: starving and struggling to stay alive. He never really knew his mother, so he relies heavily on his father to keep them alive and learn about what is going on around him.

    Despite living in such horrible circumstances, the innocence of the boy is what makes him compassionate towards anyone that his father has not marked as "a bad guy." Earlier in the book, the boy thought that he saw another little boy in the village (84). It is unclear whether or not this was real or if the boy was mistaken, but either way, it is important. As soon as the boy spotted him, he wanted to go and help, but his father said no and that they had to keep going.

    The boy was very adamant about bringing the boy with them, but of course, it would have been too great a burden on the man to be responsible for someone else too. Eventually, the boy stops complaining, but still mentions him a bit later in the book when they come across a town with seemingly no one in it since they are all dead. Instead of being relieved that this town might be safe for the time being, the boy tells his father that he "wish[ed] that little boy was with [them]," (131).

    The boy knows that the little boy is probably dead now, but if they had taken him with him then he might not be. However, the man knows that if the little boy were with them, it is possible that all three of them would be dead.

    Another instance when the boy's innocence shines is when they come across a cellar that is stock full of food, clean clothes, blankets, and water. The boy understands how valuable it all is and how it's essential for their survival, but, being the compassionate boy he is, he immediately questions if they should take any of it since it's not theirs. He feels guilty for taking advantage of the goods that were clearly stashed away by someone else for themselves. The man convinces him that is alright by telling the boy that these people were also "the good guys" so "they would want us to [have it]. Just like we would want them to," (139). The fact that the boy asked for permission and verified that he was allowed to eat this food again shows his innocence, rather than just taking it as a way to stay alive with no questions asked.

    Something else that connects the man and the boy is the constant need for reassurance by the man that they are still the "good guys." The boy knows there are bad men and women who will kill or eat them if they were to be caught. As they become more desperate, the boy continues to ask his father if they are still the "good guys" since it has most likely occurred to the man to do terrible things in order to keep them alive. Although he doesn't because of the boy, who acts as a reminder to keep his morals even in the more desperate of times. If he were to break these morals, the man fears that he would lose the boy in some way.

    The only other character that has spoken thus far in the novel is the first "bad guy" that they came across towards the beginning. Their interaction is brief, but it gives the reader a taste of the other side of the spectrum in this new world: the cannibals and murderers that will stop at absolutely nothing to stay alive. Even though it is not preferred, the man does not hesitate to choose violence if the boy is ever put in danger, since he shot this stranger as he attempted to harm his son (68).

    

    The man and the boy will have to continue down this road and survive in a way that still makes them "the good guys" in order to keep this connection between the two of them. 


Picture Citations:

"The Road (2009)." Pinterest,www.pinterest.com/pin/568579521701142455/. Accessed 7 Mar. 2021.

"The Will to Survive." Npr, 25 Nov. 2009, www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120612276. Accessed 7 Mar. 2021.

7 comments:

  1. Hi Caitlin, I really liked your character analysis post! The lack of quotations and the reasoning behind it is very cool, it's different from the books I've read and I like it. This might be a silly question, but do you think the author didn't give the man and the boy names on purpose and somehow adds to the novel?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think it's so interesting how this book discusses how someone's humanity can become fractured by immense trauma. Normally, the father would never consider abandoning his son, leaving the son to kill himself. However, from what I've read in your blog, McCarthy seems to argue that someone's humanity can prevail through anything, especially if they have something to remind them of what is most important, like how the father still has his son.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Caitlin, good discussion of the relationship of the characters. What do you think makes the boy able to be so compassionate considering that he has grown up in such a harsh environment? Do you think this is a comment on the inherent innocence of children?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it is related to the inherent innocence of children, but also because of his father. The way he always tries to do the "right thing" so that the boy continues to see that they are still the "good guys" reflects how the boy views others and life in general. This influence in addition to his natural state of innocence as a child defines the boy's character

      Delete
  4. Do you like the idea of introducing characters while the man and boy are continuing on their journey or would you have liked if they were formally introduced?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I love getting character analysis from other books, because I find it interesting how their personalities are developed and how the authors flesh them out as the book progresses. Trauma is often used in books to create characters with depth, which I also saw in my book, Mrs. Dalloway, in the character Septimus. Also, I think it's super cool how this book doesn't have names for the characters. I would assume that it makes the book a little harder to follow, or possibly harder to connect to the characters, since generally, naming things allows us to be more connected to them. Did you find that the lack of names made the characters harder to empathize with?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think we have the same views on the characters and how they are able to survive in the horrible circumstances they are in. Nice post!

    ReplyDelete

Movie vs Book

      Having both read the book and watched the movie "The Road," I can now analyze the similarities and differences between McCar...