 The man and the boy think of themselves as the "good guys." In what ways are they like and unlike the "bad guys" they encounter? What do you think McCarthy is suggesting in the scenes in which the boy begs his father to be merciful to the strangers they encounter on the road? How is the boy able to retain his compassion—to be, as one reviewer put it, "compassion incarnate"?
28 Comments
Jasper Fforde
1/6/2017 05:08:35 pm
In “The Road”, the man and the boy are unlike the bad guys they encounter because they refuse to eat people and they don’t torture others to survive. However they are like the bad guys because the man is willing to kill anyone who he thinks is a threat to them, for example the man in the woods who the father shoots in the head. In the scene where the boy begs his father to have mercy on the strangers, McCarthy is emphasizing that the boy and the man are unalike because the father just wants to protect the son at all costs however the boy is more compassionate and wants to save other people if they can. It shows that the father has been in this world too long and has seen too many awful people, so he believes that anyone and everything is a threat to his wellbeing. The boy is able to hold his compassion because he is too innocent unlike his father where his innocence is long gone for him to care about anyone but himself and his child. The boy doesn’t understand why they can’t help others because he doesn’t know how evil people can be. So when someone needs help the boy’s first instinct is to help them whereas the father’s first instinct is to protect him. wc 223
Ursula K Le Guin
1/8/2017 04:38:31 pm
I completely agree that the father is very over protective, but I also believe that sooner or later the father is going to get tired. I can see this when he contemplates whether or not to kill his child when he needed to distract the people from finding them. If he were to kill his son that would be another burden off his shoulder or he would decide to kill himself because hw could no longer go on. I also feel as if the child's innocence can somewhat annoy the father because son doesn't understand that the things he does is for a reason. His intentions aren't to hurt anyone.
P.D James
1/8/2017 08:29:38 pm
I don't think the father is being necessarily over protective but is being exactly how protective a parent in that situation should be. If your child is in danger it is your responsibility as a parent to protect your child. Yes it seems as if the father takes this too far and end's up killing another person but in that moment he didn't see any other options.
Ursula K. Le Guin
1/7/2017 06:07:25 pm
The man and the boy are like the good guys in the sense that they have each others back as much as they possibly can. The man will do anything to make sure that his son is safe and taken care of. They are also good because they don’t murder people for unrealistic reasons. However, they are like the bad guys in the sense that they will kill, but the only difference is that it’s for a “good” reason. They’re unlike the bad guys in the sense that they won’t gather a bunch of people to form an organized society to benefit themselves. The bearded men took slaves, women, and young boys in order for them to completely survive. Overall, the bearded men chose the path of violence and horror to survive.
H.G. Wells
1/8/2017 06:55:30 pm
Do you think that the boy understands the consequences that may result due to their compassion, or is he too young to see what he must do to survive? In the scene where the boy says he will share his food with the little boy he saw, I feel that he did not understand what sharing could do to him and his father. Compassion is a great thing to have for others, but is it worth it when it can be detrimental to you? This is the question that the man and the boy are forced to answer in every encounter they have with other survivors.
P.D James
1/8/2017 08:37:33 pm
I like these questions, they really make you look at things through the boys perspective. He is too young to understand not only do negative actions have consequences but in this world even positive actions meant for good have consequences as well. The boy only thinks as far as, We'll that boy is hungry, and I have food, so I'll give him some of mine. He dosent stop to think, well I don't know when I'll get more food so if I do give some of mine away I might die of starvation. That's the thing about children, their innocence many times stops them from seeing the whole picture.
Anthony Burgess
1/8/2017 10:20:38 pm
I believe that the boy does what he has been exposed to and really the only thing in which he has ever known. The boy’s main sense of communication in this world has been through his father. The father is this boy’s whole world and without him the boy would not be around at this point. The boy sees that the father is compassionate so he feels like he has to do the same thing his father would. He doesn’t see the dangers because his father does everything in his power to make sure that he is not exposed to the dangers. The father wants to keep the boys innocents at no matter what cost. 115
Magaret Atwood
1/20/2017 05:42:56 am
I strongly agree on the fact that although the man says they are "still the good guys" for not eating people, the man somewhat exhibits some actions for "good" reasons such as killing one the men in order to save the boy. In order for them to still remain the good ones, the man shouldn't have killed the man, but rather by other means protected themselves but then again I understand that it was for protection. The man without the boy I also think would have been a part of the "bad guys". I think in this case, the boy is the only good one I would say because he keeps reminding his father to be kind and merciful to people they meet, and also certain actions such as attempting to offer help to people they encounter makes him a good boy, but the question is overtime, would all his experiences also make him think of bad things to do if the need calls for it?
William Gibson
1/7/2017 10:13:37 pm
The Road establishes that the man and the boy can be considered “good guys” because they hold a moral compass in a moral-less and they refuse to resort to cannibalism. Both of them realize that while has gone down the toilet, for a lack of a better phrase, that doesn’t give them an excuse to just go around and kill anything they see. But, they do share some similarities with the “bad guys,” specifically the man. While he does try to maintain morality and teaches this to the boy, he realizes that he must protect the boy at all cost and if blood must be shed then so be it. While they don’t cause violence for the sake of violence both the man and the boy realize that they have to kill anything that they see as a threat in order to survive.
George Orwell
1/8/2017 09:19:53 pm
I agree with your analysis. They father does try to teach the son good morals despite the complications that they go through. They do not resort to eating people, but they do seek violence when someone is causing a threat to them. Compassion is needed to keep people going and it's needed in a society as well. Without compassion, everyone would be off on their own. It doesn't have to be big things, but a little reassurance can go a long way. It reminds people that they are doing something good and it makes them feel good about themselves. It's another reason for the man to keep trying. The compassion is what keeps the "fire" going. It's life. word count: 120
John Wyndham
1/8/2017 10:26:57 pm
In your blog post you referred numerously to morals, but let me ask you this. In a world where everything is destroyed based on what is moral defined? Can you use the same guideline use to describe moral in a world with boundaries and rules in a world where everything is destroyed? Think about it as a child you were taught that taking something that does not belong to you is being bad. Are the father and son bad because they go into people’s houses go through their stuff and take their food? Does moral really apply in a world where it is all about surviving. Are you really thinking about the right thing to do when every move you make is the difference between living another day or ending up as somebody’s dinner.
John Wyndham
1/7/2017 11:43:09 pm
In The Road the phrase “good guys” is thrown around alot, but based on what standards is that justify. You can say that the father and the son are the good guys because they are not willing to eat people and will not torture others to survive. The bad guys based on the farther and the son’s definition are those who eat people and have no problem hurting others if it is for their own survival. But you could also say that the father is a bad guy since he is willing to hurt anyone who threatens them. For example the father killed that man in the forest even though the boy begs him to spare his life. The father understands that letting the man go could be the end of them, but the boy who is so innocent does not see it like that. To the boy the father is just hurting another human being like them. The father have been in this world long enough to understand and fear the monster that lives within a person but the boy is young and naive and does not understate it. This shows that in a world where everything is destroyed and people are trying to hold on to the bit of humanity they have left, hope lies within people like the boy who is filled with compassion.
Ursula K Le Guin
1/8/2017 04:50:38 pm
Based on the boy's compassionate qualities do you believe that he will grow up to possible resent his father. Not to the point where, if they survived for a couple years, the boy would want to go off on his own, but maybe rely on his way of surviving in the world without compensating his own morals and beliefs. On the other hand, maybe, over time, he will start to be like his father. The boy will learn to be over protective over his loved one once he learns what the real world is like. Overall, it'll be interesting to see how the boy and the father's relationship might change over time.
Jasper Fforde
1/8/2017 09:13:54 pm
I agree because the boy hasn't been exposed to the evil that lies within people so when he sees his father or other people killing he doesn't really understand it because in his mind every life can be spared. That's why he always asks the father if they are still good guys because the father doesn't think it is soaring a life he thinks it is letting the enemy go. I also like what you said about the father being a bad guy. He's a bad guy like you said because he is going to kill if he has to, but then again in their eyes it is seen as good because it is a means of survival. WC 118
George Orwell
1/8/2017 09:25:29 pm
I like how you brought up the idea on how they aren't fully "good guys". Are there really any good guys in this world since they also kill and harm others. You could say that they are a different kind of bad guys. They are bad guys who have compassion and morals. The innocence of the boy could be another impact of being more of a good guy because he is with his father. If he were to come from another family and people, they probably would have taught him the opposite and compassion wouldn't be as big. Compassion could be killing another person for someone who you care and love. Word count:111
George Orwell
1/8/2017 12:30:00 am
In the "The Road", the boy and the father are call themselves the good guys. Unlike the bad guys in the novel, they don't keep people in hostage and keep them in a dark place where they can later be eaten. On page 137, the father told his son, "This is what the good guys do. They don't give up,". This quote has much more to it than it seems. Throughout the entire novel, the two were going through the obstacles despite their desires and needs. They did things/ made decisions based on their morals. For example, unlike the other people in this section, they do not hold people in hostage and they do not kill those who don't do harm to them. The father does not teach the boy bad morals. He also mentions how he will always be there for him and they he will not leave him. Other people would leave those who aren't as fit or do anything that will only keep themselves alive even though they may be with those who are family members. This quote means that they two will be true to themselves and they won't give up/in for things that aren't the right morals. The boy seeks compassion to strangers because he taught good morals and that compassion came with being with his father. When he sees other people he doesn't know the danger that comes with because he has limited experience and he hasn't been with many people throughout his life. words: 251
H.G. Wells
1/8/2017 07:08:14 pm
Why do you think that the father values morals so highly? In a world where people have to eat others to survive, the logical thing would be to do the same. Does the father believe that humanity may still have hope? If he didn't, I don't believe that he would be teaching his son how to be a good person while everyone else is doing bad. This is what I think he means by "carrying the torch." If they give up and lose their morality, which the rest of the world has done, the fire will burn out and life will have no purpose. I wonder if the father's drive for this will be lost in the end of the novel and if he will lose morality like the rest of the world.
Anthony Burgess
1/8/2017 10:16:58 pm
The father does seem like he has a lot of drive to get done what he beleives is right for himself and his son. This drive is what fuels the father and boy to keep going and do what is nesesary to survive. However, i beleive that something will happen to either the boy or the father and this will result in morality lost like you had mentioned. I believe that the author will add it in the end because he wants to show that at some point everyone in this cruel world will fall victim to the rules of the society. 102
Richard Bachman
1/8/2017 05:11:12 pm
The man and the boy think of themselves as the “good guys” because they don’t hunt other people and also, people hunt after them for food. An example of this is when they go downstairs in a house and find people asking for help. They scramble away knowing that there is someone else there that will kill them both. They are constantly being hunted because people have become delirious and can’t really decide from right and wrong anymore. The man and the boy are the good guys because they still have compassion and they still have morals that they hold. When the boy heard someone in the forest, he was desperate to go and help them. This was all the boy knew and what his father had raised him up to be. This post-apocalyptic world is all this little boy knew. Now, we are seeing more instances of his father going against the boy. I feel like that if the boy wasn’t there, the father would become one of the “bad guys”. I think the boy symbolizes innocence, maybe like the father once was. The boy begs his father to be merciful to the strangers because the boy wouldn’t want to be killed. I predict that the boy can only do so much for the father and the influence that he has on his father. The fire that they carry will soon burn out.
Richard Bachman
1/8/2017 05:12:17 pm
wc: 234
Jasper Fforde
1/8/2017 09:18:06 pm
I agree because I feel like the father is acting a certain way because the boy is around but I'm sure if he was gone the father would give into the bad guy eays by killing and hurting others because he won't care anymore. I think the boys innocence is what is keeping them both alive because the boy is the father's reason to live, and the boy is guiding the father in the right direction by enforcing mercy and compassion upon others. That's why he always asks if they are the good guys almost always. WC 100
H.G. Wells
1/8/2017 05:38:33 pm
The boy and his father are the "good guys" in the novel because they have retained their morals in this post-apocalyptic world. They have refused to eat other people. This is not strategic in their plan to survive and make it to the south, but they feel it is their moral duty to refrain from this. The father even told the boy that he wouldn't kill the dog that they had heard one night. However, the father does act like the bad guys in some instances. He is not merciful to the people they meet on the road including the other little boy they encounter. The boy tells his father, "And I'll give that little boy half of my food" (McCarthy 86). He knows that taking in the little boy could cause them more suffering, so he tells his son no. I think that their attempt to remain as the good guys is important in the father's idea of "carrying the torch." They may be the only ones left in the world that are morally right, and he feels that it is their job to keep morality living on. If there is any hope of civilization being restored, they must continue to be the good guys and teach others to do the same.
William Gibson
1/8/2017 07:42:30 pm
I agree with what you say, but I do have a question. Who are the “bad guys” exactly? I mean, sure we can generalize it as anyone else that the boy and the man encounter but it just doesn’t seem right to just label them off as such. Why is it that we can easily call people who have, mind you, have everything ripped away from them and have no other choice but to survive in a wasteland by any means necessary evil? If you were in their position would you do the same? I mean, when times get tough and you’re on the brink of starvation, I don’t think people are gonna be concerned about if what they’re doing is morally correct.
Anthony Burgess
1/8/2017 06:19:54 pm
In the “Road”, the boy and his father beleive that out of all the people that are still around in this post-apocalyptic world they are the good guys. While it also could be argued that the two of them are the bad guys in this scenerio. However it all depends on what makes a person good in this world. Many people agree in that the boy and the father are the good guys in this situation. When they see people they don’t eat them, and they don’t necessarily hurt people in order to stay alive. While what is considered to be bad in this world is turning to cannibalism and torturing people. However the key reason that people do those types of things is because they’re doing whatever they can in order to make sure that they survive in this world. We’re they bad people before this apocolyptic world happened. We will probably never know but i doubt it, these people were probably normal people. The boy and father don’t eat or torture the people they encounter. But in this type of world, is that the right thing to do. Let yourself and kid starve because you don’t want to hurt other people. I think McCarthy is suggesting that the boy hasn’t lost his innocents among all of these events. The boy doesn’t realize what normal life is becasue this is all what he has seen. The boy is able to retain his compassion because of his father. His father has compassion toward the people meet and the boy follows him. It is like the old saying, mokey see monkey do. 271
William Gibson
1/8/2017 08:40:13 pm
What you have said raises an interesting question, do you think because the boy was born into this apocalyptic world is the reason why he shows so much compassion? Because what he sees today and tomorrow is the same as what he has seen before so he essentially becomes unphased by all of this? And this makes me wonder, would the boy’s compassion change if he was born a few years before the disaster? Or is the boy’s compassion towards others something that’s innately inside of him? And what if the father died and he was all alone? Would he still head his father’s words and be as kind as possible to a world where everything he loves was taken from him? To me, the boy’s compassion and morality is like a small candle flame with the father trying to keep it lit. The man tries to teach the boy morality and be “good guys” so that he can “keep the fire.”
William Gibson
1/8/2017 08:41:19 pm
*response to Anthony Burgess
John Wyndham
1/8/2017 10:09:19 pm
I do believe that the boy being so compassionate is associated with the fact that he was born in an apocalyptic world. He was born and raised in this world so for all of his life this is the only thing he knows and grew to perceive it as normal. Everything that happens around him does not seem bizarre because he does not know the things that existed before this, since he is not moved by it, it is easy for him to show them compassion. His compassion could also be innate. He could have been born with it and have not gotten to the point in life where we leave childhood innocence behind and realize the world for what it is.
Aldous Huxley
1/9/2017 01:30:25 am
Word Count: 230 Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Blog Post Rubric
Archives
February 2023
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed