This past week I have been fighting conditions that in no such way are comparable to Papa or the boy's, but nonetheless awful and conditions I would not even wish upon my arch enemy. The flu. Sitting around on my couch with countless episodes of Netflix shows behind me, I decided there was no better time to begin a movie. Scrolling through the endless pages of Netflix, the idea came to me. Perhaps The Road was made into a movie adaptation? Perhaps it was on Netflix? Indeed it was, and all I had to do was hit play.
In short, the movie was great. I am not sure whether that was because I understood the underlying meanings behind or I was able to predict the pinnacle scenes. Many of my English teachers, even my parents, have told me that there is much more value in immersing oneself in a novel rather than watching a movie; however, though there is a difference between watching a movie and reading a book, each has their own special ways of revealing ideas and emotions behind the story. With a novel, you read every word. You read some words twice, three times, four if they really have stood out or are perplexing. A skilled reader can draw substance and meaning from these words. They need to build the setting, the environment, the tone, the mood, the theme all from these words. It's no easy task. With a movie, less attention is paid to studying the words and creating meaning out of them. A movie does a much better job in capturing the emotions and feelings of the movie, of the characters within it. In a movie, you can see the small changes in a character's face that indicate distress, despair, or joy. If an author were to include every small detail in a novel, it would result in being a very, very long book.
With The Road, what fascinated me most was the setting and the barren environment. Of course, I had created my own rendition of the conditions that Papa and the boy were surviving in, but I had never envisioned it as it was portrayed in the film. I imagined the landscape with trees that were evergreen, such as the trees I experience in New England. I imagined their world looked like my "winter wonderland", with much more ash and fire. On the other hand, the movie saw the landscape filled with leafless, often branchless trees. They looked like headstones at a cemetery, littering the entire world. Another important part of the setting that was done well in the film was the sky. As one would have imagined while reading the novel, there was not much difference in visibility from night to day, and this was captured very well in the film.
Tapping back into the "movies bring out more emotion" argument I proposed earlier, there were a few scenes that were unforgettable in the novel, and much more everlasting and powerful in the film. The first scene was when Papa was washing the boy's hair to rid it of the blood from the man that Papa had shot through the head. The boy is crying and screaming because of both the cold water and the traumatizing situation. Watching this unfold, rather than reading it, evoked much more emotion from me. The next scene, and in my opinion, the toughest to stomach, was the cannibal scene where Papa discovered a basement full of live people soon to be eaten. When I read the scene, I was definitely shocked and disgusted. However, when I watched the scene, I was horrified. I sensed more danger, more sadness, and more death.
While I have stated the differences in perception between the film and the novel, one scene left me with the same feeling. The final scene. In the movie, it was extended a small amount to include the family the man was talking about. Nevertheless, this scene left me with the same, optimistic feeling that it had from the novel. The last scene wraps up the themes that the novel developed, by allowing McCarthy and the director to insert their own thoughts on the thematic ideas (though I'm sure the director didn't have much choice). It shows how goodness always survives and that a strong faith can break through the most desperate of situations.
All in all, this is my final blog post, and I must admit; this experience has taught me a new way to approach and understand novels. I am very eager to move on to my next novel, but keeping The Road in mind, and apply my newfound methods to it.
Monday, March 6, 2017
Thursday, February 23, 2017
I finished! But, why AP?
To be honest, the typical emotion I feel when I finish a book, whether it was middle school English class or Ap Literature, is similar to that of an everlasting goodbye. When you think about it, you will never look through those character's eyes again, never hope for their survival, never disappoint over their ill-minded decisions. I guess this is where the phrase "closing the book on someone" comes from. Often after I finish reading a book, or more realistically a Netflix series, I just sit wherever I was, unsure about what to do with myself. In my opinion, it really sucks to form a connection with a character, hope for them and watch them grow, just to reach the final pages and have to say goodbye.
All of these emotions last for about five minutes, then I'm back to checking Instagram.
I really do think that Cormac McCarthy ended The Road perfectly. I was definitely expecting a grandiose gesture of human goodness (a thematic concept that I was banking on), but I never really was able to predict how I would feel about it. The scene between the father and the son conclude epitomize the theme of human goodness, "goodness will find the little boy. It always has. It will again" (281). Even though the father was talking about the boy that his son met earlier in the novel, it was clear that in his mind he meant his son, a boy who was born into a chaotic world but still shined with goodness. As for the man that "rescued" (the term is used loosely because rescue insinuates salvation and also because we cannot be certain about the true intentions of the strange man), I think that that was a tough call for McCarthy to make. Some readers may exclaim that it was a corny way to end a survival story, but would they have been satisfied with both the father and the son dying? What does that say about God protecting the good, or the power of human goodness? McCarthy's ending was a great way of 1) ending the depressing final scenes and 2) subtlely asserting one final bit of commentary on his thematic ideas.
Now for the big question, the one that has been lurking over me through my journey of blogging and exploring a novel on my own (for the most part). Is Cormac McCarthy's novel, The Road, of AP merit?
Yes.
Why? There are a few ways I can go about tackling this question. I could compare The Road with the past novels I have read in AP Literature, those being Song of Solomon, Brave New World, The Handmaid's Tale, and Atonement. While this is a logical method, is it not the unique qualities of a novel that make it transcendent across time as a masterpiece? All novels of AP merit, in my opinion, must achieve the same, broad goal: skillfully use literary techniques supplemented with the plot to convey a social commentary pertaining to a relevant idea in society. The means that are employed in order to achieve this goal are often unique to each other, and that is the beauty of literature.
The Road is of AP merit due to its vast collection of allusions, motifs, and symbolism that all connect to an overarching theme or meaning of the work. The motif of dreams was evident in much of the novel's key scenes and was wrapped up incredibly. "[Papa] fell into a dreamless sleep"; remember how I emphasized that dreams were Death's way of reaching out to people. A dreamless sleep doesn't mean that Death has stopped chasing, it means that Death has found you. This motif was related to the thematic concept of hope, and how maintaining hope but remaining realistic is the best remedy of survival.
McCarthy also connects allusions to his thematic ideas. For example, the allusion to the Greek myth of Phaeton (explained in previous blog post) and the theme of human goodness's empowering property. McCarthy used this allusion to elaborate on his ideas of human goodness as portrayed by the relationship and values of Papa and his son. This novel is of AP merit because he deliberately uses complex literary devices to convey the meaning of the work as a whole.
Another facet of the novel that I believe highlights its worthiness of AP merit is the subtlety of Cormac McCarthy's own ideas within the novel. He disguised his own values in the novel through the dialogue and thoughts of Papa and the boy. He used this method to share his ideas on spirituality and morals and their respective fluctuations in a time of severe crisis. This is a strong indicator of the novels complex underlying meanings and uniqueness.
All in all, The Road is an AP worthy novel as demonstrated by Cormac McCarthy's ability to connect literary devices to multiple themes and employ his own commentary into the novel discussing relative social controversies.
All of these emotions last for about five minutes, then I'm back to checking Instagram.
I really do think that Cormac McCarthy ended The Road perfectly. I was definitely expecting a grandiose gesture of human goodness (a thematic concept that I was banking on), but I never really was able to predict how I would feel about it. The scene between the father and the son conclude epitomize the theme of human goodness, "goodness will find the little boy. It always has. It will again" (281). Even though the father was talking about the boy that his son met earlier in the novel, it was clear that in his mind he meant his son, a boy who was born into a chaotic world but still shined with goodness. As for the man that "rescued" (the term is used loosely because rescue insinuates salvation and also because we cannot be certain about the true intentions of the strange man), I think that that was a tough call for McCarthy to make. Some readers may exclaim that it was a corny way to end a survival story, but would they have been satisfied with both the father and the son dying? What does that say about God protecting the good, or the power of human goodness? McCarthy's ending was a great way of 1) ending the depressing final scenes and 2) subtlely asserting one final bit of commentary on his thematic ideas.
Now for the big question, the one that has been lurking over me through my journey of blogging and exploring a novel on my own (for the most part). Is Cormac McCarthy's novel, The Road, of AP merit?
Yes.
Why? There are a few ways I can go about tackling this question. I could compare The Road with the past novels I have read in AP Literature, those being Song of Solomon, Brave New World, The Handmaid's Tale, and Atonement. While this is a logical method, is it not the unique qualities of a novel that make it transcendent across time as a masterpiece? All novels of AP merit, in my opinion, must achieve the same, broad goal: skillfully use literary techniques supplemented with the plot to convey a social commentary pertaining to a relevant idea in society. The means that are employed in order to achieve this goal are often unique to each other, and that is the beauty of literature.
The Road is of AP merit due to its vast collection of allusions, motifs, and symbolism that all connect to an overarching theme or meaning of the work. The motif of dreams was evident in much of the novel's key scenes and was wrapped up incredibly. "[Papa] fell into a dreamless sleep"; remember how I emphasized that dreams were Death's way of reaching out to people. A dreamless sleep doesn't mean that Death has stopped chasing, it means that Death has found you. This motif was related to the thematic concept of hope, and how maintaining hope but remaining realistic is the best remedy of survival.
McCarthy also connects allusions to his thematic ideas. For example, the allusion to the Greek myth of Phaeton (explained in previous blog post) and the theme of human goodness's empowering property. McCarthy used this allusion to elaborate on his ideas of human goodness as portrayed by the relationship and values of Papa and his son. This novel is of AP merit because he deliberately uses complex literary devices to convey the meaning of the work as a whole.
Another facet of the novel that I believe highlights its worthiness of AP merit is the subtlety of Cormac McCarthy's own ideas within the novel. He disguised his own values in the novel through the dialogue and thoughts of Papa and the boy. He used this method to share his ideas on spirituality and morals and their respective fluctuations in a time of severe crisis. This is a strong indicator of the novels complex underlying meanings and uniqueness.
All in all, The Road is an AP worthy novel as demonstrated by Cormac McCarthy's ability to connect literary devices to multiple themes and employ his own commentary into the novel discussing relative social controversies.
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Greek mythology, strong motifs, and other topics for consideration!
We all knew that the joyous moment our characters discovered the bunker stocked with food and supplies was not everlasting. While I was disappointed, the strategic move of abandoning the bunker and pushing forward toward the coast spoke to the identity of Papa. He knew that they would not be able to stay there forever and that the best chance for salvation was the coast. Once again, Papa displays his desire for salvation is much more than for survival.
Now, to the good stuff.
What was that business when Papa and the boy were helping the decrepit, old man about him being a god and them being trees? Shoutout to my myth and folklore teacher, Mr. Brandt, for teaching us the Greek story of Phaethon. In short, we have this youngster who is the son of the sun-god, Apollo. In trying to rationalize and redeem himself after losing a race to one of the sons of Zeus, he exclaims his father allows him to steer the sun-chariot. This comes to that and against all logic and reasoning, Apollo lets his over-confident son, Phaethon, steer the chariot for a day. The powerful horses of fire that drive the chariot sense the weakness of our youngster Phaethon and decide to take him and Ethiopia, in particular, for quite the ride. The sun scorches parts of the Earth (interesting how ALL of Earth is scorched in The Road), specifically Ethiopia. Zeus, the powerful king of the gods cannot have this happen to the world he protects, thus he fires a thunderbolt at the sun chariot, sending a lifeless Phaethon into a river. During his mourning, Apollo feels as if it was his fault that this mess occurred, and in order to relieve the sisters of Phaethon of their grief, he turns them to poplar trees by the river in which Phaethon's body lies. The poplar trees served to protect Phaethon for eternity. So that's my synopsis, but how does it all relate?
As I mentioned in my excellent synopsis (comment below if I errored in any of the details; I must admit is just a mere reconstruction of my memory), one of the most obvious relations between the myth and The Road is the idea that Earth is burned. Phaethon allows for the sun-chariot to fall too close to the land and thus it gets scorched. The land Papa and the boy are confronting is as such: barren and ash-ridden. Whether McCarthy was intending to weigh in on whether God is great (saving Papa and the boy) or evil (responsible for the Earth's destruction), it is reasonable to draw a parallel between the two settings. The gods, though indirectly, caused the burning of Ethiopia. Perhaps the God in The Road is responsible for the destruction of land? Was it a natural disaster? Though I cannot say for sure, through this allusion to Greek mythology, McCarthy is finally asserting his own opinions into the novel.
Of course, we cannot forget what has led us to this allusion. "Perhaps he'd turn into a god and they to trees" (163). In this scenario, we can identify the old man as Apollo, and Papa and the boy as the sisters of Phaethon. The poplar trees were protecting the spirit/resting place of Phaethon, so what are Papa and the boy protecting. The two characters, in my opinion, represent the goodness of mankind, a concept that has been lost to the desolate world as gangs resort to cannibalism and murder to survive. Papa and the boy are "protecting" the goodness found within humanity by preserving the ideals and morals that one would find in the world prior to the cataclysmic event. They refuse to succumb to cannibalism, they refuse to murder people, and they refuse to rob people. To them, they are the good guys, "they keep trying. They don't give up" (137). This is consistent with what we have obtained from the dialogue between Papa and the boy. They regard themselves as the good guys, the ones who are "carrying the fire", and state that the bad guys are those who do not. Are Papa and the boy the last moralistic survivors? It seems the allusion suggests this.
Dreams have been a recurring idea throughout the novel. In my first post about the characters, I described dreams as a way for Death (a character) to call or to taunt, if you will, the survivors. The vivid images of yellow leaves and blue skies that used to be a common sight remind the dreamer of the utterly bleak and desperate situation they are in. In this section of The Road, Papa exclaims that "when your dreams are of some world that never was or of some world that never will be and you are happy again then you will have given up" (189). Dreams as a motif have illuminated the significance of keeping a realistic mindset. While Papa appears to have hope, he keeps an edge, he expects trouble. This helps him and his son survive against the environment and the dangerous gangs. One example of Papa's realistic edge is when they had found the bunker rich with food and supplies. Papa knew that the supplies would eventually run out, the bunker would eventually become a coffin, and that the bunker would eventually be found by someone else. Papa's ideas on dreams and their manipulative power help his chances of survival. On his toes day and night, Papa has come to expect the worst out of people, contrary to the goodness he and his son represent.
Message to all readers who are also on The Road: Have you noticed the development of the boy? At the beginning of the novel, it was clear he was scared of most situations, only really thought about death, and was mildly stubborn. Now, he is reasoning logically about the difference between good and bad, learning from his father, and becoming more explorative. When the two come upon a deserted train, the boy investigates it a little on his own. From what I understand about the boy, this is highly uncharacteristic of him. Perhaps the environment is changing him? One must consider that the cannibals could have been decent, moral people before their worlds were destroyed. Maybe this idea that people are forced to change under high-pressure circumstances is a theme of the novel? Besides becoming a tad more riskier, the father hasn't changed all that much from the first seventy pages. The difference between the father and the boy's developmental path may answer the question of whether or not the boy is more like his mother than his father.
Now, to the good stuff.
What was that business when Papa and the boy were helping the decrepit, old man about him being a god and them being trees? Shoutout to my myth and folklore teacher, Mr. Brandt, for teaching us the Greek story of Phaethon. In short, we have this youngster who is the son of the sun-god, Apollo. In trying to rationalize and redeem himself after losing a race to one of the sons of Zeus, he exclaims his father allows him to steer the sun-chariot. This comes to that and against all logic and reasoning, Apollo lets his over-confident son, Phaethon, steer the chariot for a day. The powerful horses of fire that drive the chariot sense the weakness of our youngster Phaethon and decide to take him and Ethiopia, in particular, for quite the ride. The sun scorches parts of the Earth (interesting how ALL of Earth is scorched in The Road), specifically Ethiopia. Zeus, the powerful king of the gods cannot have this happen to the world he protects, thus he fires a thunderbolt at the sun chariot, sending a lifeless Phaethon into a river. During his mourning, Apollo feels as if it was his fault that this mess occurred, and in order to relieve the sisters of Phaethon of their grief, he turns them to poplar trees by the river in which Phaethon's body lies. The poplar trees served to protect Phaethon for eternity. So that's my synopsis, but how does it all relate?
As I mentioned in my excellent synopsis (comment below if I errored in any of the details; I must admit is just a mere reconstruction of my memory), one of the most obvious relations between the myth and The Road is the idea that Earth is burned. Phaethon allows for the sun-chariot to fall too close to the land and thus it gets scorched. The land Papa and the boy are confronting is as such: barren and ash-ridden. Whether McCarthy was intending to weigh in on whether God is great (saving Papa and the boy) or evil (responsible for the Earth's destruction), it is reasonable to draw a parallel between the two settings. The gods, though indirectly, caused the burning of Ethiopia. Perhaps the God in The Road is responsible for the destruction of land? Was it a natural disaster? Though I cannot say for sure, through this allusion to Greek mythology, McCarthy is finally asserting his own opinions into the novel.
Of course, we cannot forget what has led us to this allusion. "Perhaps he'd turn into a god and they to trees" (163). In this scenario, we can identify the old man as Apollo, and Papa and the boy as the sisters of Phaethon. The poplar trees were protecting the spirit/resting place of Phaethon, so what are Papa and the boy protecting. The two characters, in my opinion, represent the goodness of mankind, a concept that has been lost to the desolate world as gangs resort to cannibalism and murder to survive. Papa and the boy are "protecting" the goodness found within humanity by preserving the ideals and morals that one would find in the world prior to the cataclysmic event. They refuse to succumb to cannibalism, they refuse to murder people, and they refuse to rob people. To them, they are the good guys, "they keep trying. They don't give up" (137). This is consistent with what we have obtained from the dialogue between Papa and the boy. They regard themselves as the good guys, the ones who are "carrying the fire", and state that the bad guys are those who do not. Are Papa and the boy the last moralistic survivors? It seems the allusion suggests this.
Dreams have been a recurring idea throughout the novel. In my first post about the characters, I described dreams as a way for Death (a character) to call or to taunt, if you will, the survivors. The vivid images of yellow leaves and blue skies that used to be a common sight remind the dreamer of the utterly bleak and desperate situation they are in. In this section of The Road, Papa exclaims that "when your dreams are of some world that never was or of some world that never will be and you are happy again then you will have given up" (189). Dreams as a motif have illuminated the significance of keeping a realistic mindset. While Papa appears to have hope, he keeps an edge, he expects trouble. This helps him and his son survive against the environment and the dangerous gangs. One example of Papa's realistic edge is when they had found the bunker rich with food and supplies. Papa knew that the supplies would eventually run out, the bunker would eventually become a coffin, and that the bunker would eventually be found by someone else. Papa's ideas on dreams and their manipulative power help his chances of survival. On his toes day and night, Papa has come to expect the worst out of people, contrary to the goodness he and his son represent.
Message to all readers who are also on The Road: Have you noticed the development of the boy? At the beginning of the novel, it was clear he was scared of most situations, only really thought about death, and was mildly stubborn. Now, he is reasoning logically about the difference between good and bad, learning from his father, and becoming more explorative. When the two come upon a deserted train, the boy investigates it a little on his own. From what I understand about the boy, this is highly uncharacteristic of him. Perhaps the environment is changing him? One must consider that the cannibals could have been decent, moral people before their worlds were destroyed. Maybe this idea that people are forced to change under high-pressure circumstances is a theme of the novel? Besides becoming a tad more riskier, the father hasn't changed all that much from the first seventy pages. The difference between the father and the boy's developmental path may answer the question of whether or not the boy is more like his mother than his father.
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Is it too early to make a post about theme?
In my opinion, no!
With a little more than fifty percent of The Road behind me (though still in mind), I have started to sense the budding fruits of thematic ideas. If you read my previous blog post pertaining to the characters of The Road, you will remember that I predicted a thematic concept to be the necessity of human connection. While the idea still remains relevant, there haven't been many significant passages relating to the idea of human connection. And of course, this is why we make predictions. Even if we are wrong, we still learn something. With the absence of the emphasis on human connection, two thematic ideas/questions have been brought to the surface: the struggle between defining good and evil and the fickleness of one's beliefs in a time of crisis.
Even today, we struggle with defining the line between the good and the evil. What one may perceive as evil, they may soon perceive as good in another situation. The conditions the survivors in The Road are enduring make the famous line from Shakespeare's Macbeth all too real, "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" (Act one, scene one) How's that for your daily chiasmus? In this section of The Road, the dialogue between Papa and the boy highlights their views on who the good people in society are and who the bad people are. The boy frequently asks, "are we still the good guys?", and with every inquiry, Papa responds "yes" (77). Papa had just shot the man that was threatening his son through the head, killing him. Papa had done what was necessary to keep him and most importantly, his son, alive. However, with this "do what's necessary to survive" mentality, blending arises between good and evil. Aren't the gangs that patrol the roads and enslave people doing everything they can to survive? Are the cannibalistic clans not starving and resorting to their last chance of survival? What moral costs serve as the line in the sand between good and evil under such desperate circumstances? Who draws that line? God?
For Papa and the boy, the main action that serves as this line is cannibalism. Papa notes that "no matter what"..."[we wouldn't ever eat anybody]"..."[because we're the good guys]" (128). This passage follows their escape from the barn, prison to helpless people, food to the gangs. Papa and the boy would rather face Death head on than compromise their morals and become cannibals. Through their eyes, Papa and his son, this is what separates them from the evil that remains in the barren world around them. Papa and the boy use a symbolic phrase that means that they are still the good guys. "We're carrying the fire" (129). This phrase is symbolic for hope and God. "The fire" is the hope that perseverance will prevail and that one must keep positive morals to triumph through a desperate time. Papa and the boy still have hope that they can make it south and find salvation. Another way of looking at "the fire" is the belief in God. As long as they keep true to God, and understand that he is watching over them, they will overcome their circumstances. While the bad guys are cannibals and murderers, they are keeping true to the power of God and maintaining hope that they will survive. Those are their distinctions between good guys and bad guys.
Once again, I would like to emphasize the quote from Macbeth, "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" because this is the thematic idea that McCarthy is conveying. When crisis dominates our society, when life itself begins to fall apart, the line between good and evil becomes gray. The struggles the reader of The Road must go through when thinking about the similar motives between the gangs and Papa and his boy, survival, highlight the dissipation of that line in the sand, the one that tells us right from wrong.
The other thematic idea that became apparent to me during this section of The Road is that one's beliefs are fickle under undesirable conditions. In the beginning of the novel, Papa expresses his anguish towards God. "Have you a neck by which to throttle you? Have you a heart? Damn you eternally have you a soul? Oh God..." (12). The perceived unresponsiveness of God by Papa leads him to these angry questions. As discussed earlier, Papa believes that they are the good guys, and it is reasonable to assume from this passage that he is angry with God's lack of protection of the good guys. The questions Papa asks the sky or thinks to himself (it is not clear), help dehumanize his view of God. When people think of God, they traditionally visualize a man. By dehumanizing God, McCarthy allows to reader to infer that Papa's belief in a higher power that preserves the goodness of mankind is beginning to weaken.
Side note: This thematic idea is very relevant in today's society. The common question "is there no God?" is asked when dealing with traumatic scenarios such as death, accidents, and disaster. For many people, their belief in God fluctuates throughout their lives and especially in times of crisis. I find it interesting and even more so captivating how McCarthy has begun to illustrate this idea in his plot.
Back to the discussion, we start to see Papa's faith in God return when he is rationalizing his actions during the confrontation with the gang member. He says that he "was appointed to [protect his son] by God", the same God he wishes to throttle the neck of (77). His loss of faith earlier in the novel is retrieved in this passage where he cites his motivation to get his son through the terrible world as God's decree. Later, just after escaping the cannibalistic gang, when Papa thinks that this could be the end of their survival, he grabs the gun from his son and thinks to himself, "Can you do it? When the time comes? When the time comes there will be no time. Now is the time. Curse God and die" (114). Papa ordered his son to kill himself if the gang members found him, but seeing that the boy was much too shocked to act, he took the gun and prepared to liberate his son himself. This passage is when Papa's faith is lowest, and he is seconds away from giving up on God and succumbing to Death.
The last fluctuation in Papa's faith is when he finds the bunker packed full of survival supplies, clothes, and food. In the short passage that captures the reaction of Papa to the fortuitous discovery, Papa says "Oh my God" four times. Like most people with a vacillating life such as Papa's (hopefully not an apocalyptic world), his faith is situation-dependent. When events are going relatively well his faith in God and that he looks out for the good guys is strengthened. When the events take a turn for the worst, he loses his sense of faith and lashes out at God.
The other thematic idea that became apparent to me during this section of The Road is that one's beliefs are fickle under undesirable conditions. In the beginning of the novel, Papa expresses his anguish towards God. "Have you a neck by which to throttle you? Have you a heart? Damn you eternally have you a soul? Oh God..." (12). The perceived unresponsiveness of God by Papa leads him to these angry questions. As discussed earlier, Papa believes that they are the good guys, and it is reasonable to assume from this passage that he is angry with God's lack of protection of the good guys. The questions Papa asks the sky or thinks to himself (it is not clear), help dehumanize his view of God. When people think of God, they traditionally visualize a man. By dehumanizing God, McCarthy allows to reader to infer that Papa's belief in a higher power that preserves the goodness of mankind is beginning to weaken.
Side note: This thematic idea is very relevant in today's society. The common question "is there no God?" is asked when dealing with traumatic scenarios such as death, accidents, and disaster. For many people, their belief in God fluctuates throughout their lives and especially in times of crisis. I find it interesting and even more so captivating how McCarthy has begun to illustrate this idea in his plot.
Back to the discussion, we start to see Papa's faith in God return when he is rationalizing his actions during the confrontation with the gang member. He says that he "was appointed to [protect his son] by God", the same God he wishes to throttle the neck of (77). His loss of faith earlier in the novel is retrieved in this passage where he cites his motivation to get his son through the terrible world as God's decree. Later, just after escaping the cannibalistic gang, when Papa thinks that this could be the end of their survival, he grabs the gun from his son and thinks to himself, "Can you do it? When the time comes? When the time comes there will be no time. Now is the time. Curse God and die" (114). Papa ordered his son to kill himself if the gang members found him, but seeing that the boy was much too shocked to act, he took the gun and prepared to liberate his son himself. This passage is when Papa's faith is lowest, and he is seconds away from giving up on God and succumbing to Death.
The last fluctuation in Papa's faith is when he finds the bunker packed full of survival supplies, clothes, and food. In the short passage that captures the reaction of Papa to the fortuitous discovery, Papa says "Oh my God" four times. Like most people with a vacillating life such as Papa's (hopefully not an apocalyptic world), his faith is situation-dependent. When events are going relatively well his faith in God and that he looks out for the good guys is strengthened. When the events take a turn for the worst, he loses his sense of faith and lashes out at God.
Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Quality over Quantity: The Characters of The Road
Well, here it is, my first blog post.
I was very eager to throw myself into the deep abyss of confusion and critical-thinking, that is a fresh, so-called (to be determined by your's truly) AP merit novel. As I turned to the first page and began my adventure, I thought back to some of the prevalent themes in the novels we had previously read in class. Because I understood that the plot of this novel was about a father and a son traveling a scorched earth and navigating the dangers of a new life, with no hesitation I remembered the thematic idea of the need for human connection. My prediction: as the storyline progresses, as I travel further down The Road, this concept will become the pinnacle of this story...that is, human connection is responsible for the characters' survival.
Personally, when I begin reading a new book, the most challenging part is keeping all of the different characters straight. As you can imagine, Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon was a formidable endeavor with the vast amount of characters and personalities to keep in order. Not to mention three characters were all given the same name (thank heavens for Ruth's prolonged breastfeeding). The Road, on the other hand, is not flashy with its extent of meaningful character foils and symbolic lines of lineage; it initially boasts only two characters, a father, and a son.
The father, let's call him Papa, is struggling to survive a barren environment, scarred by fire, with his son, we'll call him "the boy". As a reader, I can relate to these characters because much like them, I am in the dark when it comes to understanding their situation: how they got there, what it was like before, and if there is salvation? Most of the characterization of Papa and the boy is derived from the dialogue that they share, or flashbacks illustrated through the eyes of Papa.
Papa wants to survive. He wants to keep living and overcome the challenges that have been thrown their way. His motive? His son. When asked by his son "what would you do if I died", Papa responded that "if you died I would want to die too" (11). The only reason Papa has continued to look out for himself and fight the harsh environment is to protect his son. "The boy was all that stood between him and death" (29). In a flashback, Papa relives the moment when his wife had decided to leave him and his son to escape the painful world by means of suicide. In this flashback, death is personified. His wife has "taken a new lover [Death]" (57). This conversation with his wife speaks to his chief value: death is not the answer, life is. Because of his experiences with his wife, he becomes defensive when his son says that he wishes he was dead. The major conflict that faces Papa is, as one could infer from the above background, death. Death has taken much from him; his friends, his wife, and safety. Papa (along with much of his surroundings) is associated with the color gray, which represents loss and depression. Tormented by the loss he has experienced, he warns his son that "you forget what you want to remember and you remember what you want to forget" (12). An eloquent chiasmus, Papa is haunted by his past and is protecting his son in order to find solace. Papa takes extreme measures to protect his son from the harsh environment and the brutal gangs. He uses one of his last two bullets on a man that has his son's neck to the blade of a knife. His son is the last thing he could possibly lose, and with the ash as "gray as his heart", losing his son would force him to slip into the darkness that blankets the world (27).
The boy is primarily characterized by dialogue. He is frightened, naïve, and inquisitive. Through a conversation between Papa and his wife, it can be reasonably inferred that the boy was born into the world that was starting to slip away. Unlike his father, the barren landscape of ash and dust is the only world he has known. So one can imagine the immense questioning this child has the propensity for. The inquisitive nature of the boy highlights how he does not quite understand the situation he and his father are in. When his father and him come upon a man, who had seemingly been struck by lightning, the boy presses his father to help the man in any way he could. The boy asks repeatedly, "cant we help him Papa?"..."cant we help him Papa?" (50). The father knows that under their circumstances, there is nothing that can be done to aid the man, but the boy is unable to see the world through the eyes of his father. Another example of the naivety of the boy is when they find a relatively nice place by a river. The boy pleas to his father to stay for one more day, but the father knows that losing time brings them both closer to death. In summary, the boy is naïve, and is yet to realize that he and his father are all each other have.
BLOG TWIST: Even though I stated earlier that there are only two characters, in my opinion, there are actually three. Some would say I lied to you in my opening remarks about how many characters were present in the novel, but I just call it alternative facts. Anyways, can you guess the third character? The wife you say? No, guess again! Death? Correct!
*gasp*
But how can Death be a character when it is an abstract, intangible concept? McCarthy personifies Death to a point where it becomes the antagonist of the story. The main characters, Papa and his son, have one goal, to survive and continue southwards. Their only opposition? Death. Death is as pervasive as the ash that settles in the remote areas of the dark land the main characters are surviving in. Death calls to the characters, primarily Papa in his dreams. It tempts him with "dreams so rich in color. How else would Death call you?" (21). The fantasies and memories of what life used to be are Death's way of reaching out and touching the characters. Death is closely associated with the gray ash that covers the land and swallows the light of the sun, inescapable. The protagonists, Papa and the boy, will need to overcome the antagonist. According to my prediction at the beginning of this post, the power of human connection will help our characters triumph over Death.
I was very eager to throw myself into the deep abyss of confusion and critical-thinking, that is a fresh, so-called (to be determined by your's truly) AP merit novel. As I turned to the first page and began my adventure, I thought back to some of the prevalent themes in the novels we had previously read in class. Because I understood that the plot of this novel was about a father and a son traveling a scorched earth and navigating the dangers of a new life, with no hesitation I remembered the thematic idea of the need for human connection. My prediction: as the storyline progresses, as I travel further down The Road, this concept will become the pinnacle of this story...that is, human connection is responsible for the characters' survival.
Personally, when I begin reading a new book, the most challenging part is keeping all of the different characters straight. As you can imagine, Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon was a formidable endeavor with the vast amount of characters and personalities to keep in order. Not to mention three characters were all given the same name (thank heavens for Ruth's prolonged breastfeeding). The Road, on the other hand, is not flashy with its extent of meaningful character foils and symbolic lines of lineage; it initially boasts only two characters, a father, and a son.
The father, let's call him Papa, is struggling to survive a barren environment, scarred by fire, with his son, we'll call him "the boy". As a reader, I can relate to these characters because much like them, I am in the dark when it comes to understanding their situation: how they got there, what it was like before, and if there is salvation? Most of the characterization of Papa and the boy is derived from the dialogue that they share, or flashbacks illustrated through the eyes of Papa.
Papa wants to survive. He wants to keep living and overcome the challenges that have been thrown their way. His motive? His son. When asked by his son "what would you do if I died", Papa responded that "if you died I would want to die too" (11). The only reason Papa has continued to look out for himself and fight the harsh environment is to protect his son. "The boy was all that stood between him and death" (29). In a flashback, Papa relives the moment when his wife had decided to leave him and his son to escape the painful world by means of suicide. In this flashback, death is personified. His wife has "taken a new lover [Death]" (57). This conversation with his wife speaks to his chief value: death is not the answer, life is. Because of his experiences with his wife, he becomes defensive when his son says that he wishes he was dead. The major conflict that faces Papa is, as one could infer from the above background, death. Death has taken much from him; his friends, his wife, and safety. Papa (along with much of his surroundings) is associated with the color gray, which represents loss and depression. Tormented by the loss he has experienced, he warns his son that "you forget what you want to remember and you remember what you want to forget" (12). An eloquent chiasmus, Papa is haunted by his past and is protecting his son in order to find solace. Papa takes extreme measures to protect his son from the harsh environment and the brutal gangs. He uses one of his last two bullets on a man that has his son's neck to the blade of a knife. His son is the last thing he could possibly lose, and with the ash as "gray as his heart", losing his son would force him to slip into the darkness that blankets the world (27).
The boy is primarily characterized by dialogue. He is frightened, naïve, and inquisitive. Through a conversation between Papa and his wife, it can be reasonably inferred that the boy was born into the world that was starting to slip away. Unlike his father, the barren landscape of ash and dust is the only world he has known. So one can imagine the immense questioning this child has the propensity for. The inquisitive nature of the boy highlights how he does not quite understand the situation he and his father are in. When his father and him come upon a man, who had seemingly been struck by lightning, the boy presses his father to help the man in any way he could. The boy asks repeatedly, "cant we help him Papa?"..."cant we help him Papa?" (50). The father knows that under their circumstances, there is nothing that can be done to aid the man, but the boy is unable to see the world through the eyes of his father. Another example of the naivety of the boy is when they find a relatively nice place by a river. The boy pleas to his father to stay for one more day, but the father knows that losing time brings them both closer to death. In summary, the boy is naïve, and is yet to realize that he and his father are all each other have.
BLOG TWIST: Even though I stated earlier that there are only two characters, in my opinion, there are actually three. Some would say I lied to you in my opening remarks about how many characters were present in the novel, but I just call it alternative facts. Anyways, can you guess the third character? The wife you say? No, guess again! Death? Correct!
*gasp*
But how can Death be a character when it is an abstract, intangible concept? McCarthy personifies Death to a point where it becomes the antagonist of the story. The main characters, Papa and his son, have one goal, to survive and continue southwards. Their only opposition? Death. Death is as pervasive as the ash that settles in the remote areas of the dark land the main characters are surviving in. Death calls to the characters, primarily Papa in his dreams. It tempts him with "dreams so rich in color. How else would Death call you?" (21). The fantasies and memories of what life used to be are Death's way of reaching out and touching the characters. Death is closely associated with the gray ash that covers the land and swallows the light of the sun, inescapable. The protagonists, Papa and the boy, will need to overcome the antagonist. According to my prediction at the beginning of this post, the power of human connection will help our characters triumph over Death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)