The Road by Cormac McCarthy portrayed the relationship of a father and son during a rough time in life. The connection between the father and son is seen clearly at the beginning of the novel but as the novel progresses the difference in their personality is seen through how they tolerate their journey. The father constantly refers to him and his son as the “good people”. He believes they are the only good ones left in their area since the people they have encountered has started murdering people and eating them. The son does not understand the impact of their new life and does not agree with how his father takes care of them. At some point in the novel McCarthy says that the son and his father’s relationship would be torn apart if they were not going through this traumatic experience together. Unlike the father the son has a love for humanity and if he has the sources to help someone he would do so. This is first seen when the son notices a little boy and wants to take him with them and the father says no because no one can be trusted. The action of the father truly upsets the son and that causes him not to speak to his father for a while. The characters Ely and the African American man, the thief, also portray the difference in the way the father and son view people. This can be attributed to the maturity difference and life experience but as the novel continues the reader realizes the father is preparing his son for living a life with out him.
As they travel more south in their journey the father constantly reminds the son to “carry the fire”. He says this because he knows that he is getting sick and that eventually the son will have to continue living without him. The father needs to reassure the son that he should not give up and not just accept everyone though they seem approachable. The father is aware that his son appreciates humanity and cannot stay angry with him about his trust and willingness to help everyone because the son is innocent and has some glimmer of hope that life will get better. The reader notices the father getting ill and it concerns the reader because a love for the son has developed and the reader does not want the boy to be harmed in anyway.
While watching the film and being able to witness the scene of the new world and the filth the father and son live in everyday brings sadness because the only thing left to do is die. It seems as if death is unavoidable. The film intensifies emotions and opens up the readers’ eyes to what the father and son had to go through to survive. The scene that was most impacting was when the father forced the thief to take off all his clothes because he wanted him to feel how they felt when he took their things. The thief cried and the only thing that saved him from death was the son. The father is angry that the son wanted the thief to live though he left them with nothing. As the film and novel nears an end the father is getting sicker and death finally takes over him. This is very traumatic because now the reader wonders what will happen to the son. Well unbeknown to the son and the reader a family was following them the entire time and wants to take him in and after asking if they are the good people he goes with them. The reader is worried because how can one be sure this man is actually telling the truth but once the mans family approaches and the reader sees the man has a wife and children and the son is the child the boy saw previously the reader can assume that the son will be safe and continue to carry the fire like his father requested. In concluding the end of the novel and the film is the same accept that the film allows the reader to see the fear in the son and reassurance that he is doing the right thing by going with them.
3 comments:
Celestine: I definitely agree that there is an obvious difference in personality between the father and his son. While the father tries to transmit the importance of being the few "good people" who are left in the world, I think the son's actions speak more of empathy, rather than the father's words, which have little evidence to back them up. I think this is the case because the father has the brunt of responsibility when it comes to making sure that both he and his son survive, and I agree with you that it has something to do with the fact that the father is preparing the son to live on his own. The boy would not survive if he put his trust in everyone and gave up his resources for the sake of compassion.
I think the scene with the thief is really important in terms of showing just how different the father and son are. I understand that the father was upset that had the thief gotten away, he and his son would have been left with nothing. That said, while I was reading/watching that scene, I thought the father went a little over board. Now maybe I felt that way because I was not in that situation, but I think the father should have recognized that the other man was just as desperate as the father and son were.
Before I even watched the movie, as I was reading the book, I sort of instinctually felt that the man and his family were other "good" people. I guess that might be because I needed the novel to end with something that gave me hope, and so I chose to believe that the boy would end up in good hands.
-Stephanie Baker
I'm not entirely sure how this post answers the question posed about the final scene of the novel and the film. This is primarily a summary of the plot and does not really address the differences between the novel's ending and the film's and how they affect the reader's view of what happens to the boy in the end.
I do agree that it is difficult to be pessimistic about the boy's future. The entirety of the book and the film were so bleak and gruesome that one could only hope that the boy was in good hands with the people he decided to go off with. At that point, without his father, there was nothing he could do but trust them. He very much relied on his father for his survival, particularly in the novel, which made me picture him as even younger than he was portrayed in the film. Although his father tells him not to take chances with potentially dangerous people, if he does not trust these people he will probably die anyway. It may be overly optimistic of the reader/viewer to trust these people, but it is just instinctual to try to construct a hopeful future for the innocent and harmless young boy.
Bornstein does have a point. you need to do less summary. We have all read the book and seen the film, so focus on the question posed by the blog prompt.
Post a Comment