My automatic response to this question involves the meaning of good and evil. There are many times in this book where the man, who continues to refer to himself as good, does things that most would say challenge that title. A few examples of this are refusing the old man food, forcing the thief to give up his clothes, and shooting the man in the window with a flare gun. The first two he more or less repaid for his wrong doing: allowing the son to offer the old man a few cans, and returning the thief's clothes to the spot from which they were taken. However the last one... not so much. In times like these, the idea of good and evil has a bit of a skewed perspective. These are bad things that he's done, but compared to cannibalism, he's one of the good guys. It's all a matter of survival, and him and the boy are doing it the more human and humane way.
Similarly, the human spirit and its limits come to mind. Surviving days without food or continuing to have love for and care for another individual besides yourself when you have next to nothing, these two really show what a human is capable of, and that we can still be ourselves when all familiarity is gone. Sometimes the worst can even bring out the best in us. The man became a better father to the boy throughout these harsh times.
2 comments:
I also thought the ideas of good and evil in this story were quite interesting, and occasionally questionable. As you mentioned, this topic is brought up throughout the book; in the boy's still innocent state, he needs constant reminding that he and his father are still the "good" guys. It was actually fascinating to me that although the boy was born into this world filled with evil and darkness, he had this inherent urge to be generous and good. This obviously came from the innocence and purity of being young. It would be interesting to see if with age, the boy would come to no longer feel the urge to be a good guy.
I appreciated the father's determination to shelter the boy, despite their completely R-rated life. He seemed to want to preserve the boy's innocence as long as possible. I'm sure it was inspiring to him to hear his son's pleas to help others and his unease to hurt anyone, even a "bad" guy. This must have also contributed to the man's will to reach the coast and carry on in spite of endless hardships.
I agree; The Road did bring up some a lot of questions about good and evil. For me, one of the most pressing questions regarded the source of the altered morals in the world of the man and the boy. In The Road, some people revert to cannibalism/slavery, while others stay “good” and “pure” (as we see with The Boy, who is portrayed as being extremely innocent). There are also the others (i.e. The Man) who inhabit a sort of “moral grey area”. These people try not to hurt others, but in the end will be willing to do almost anything for the sake of survival. As I read more and more about the horrible things people did, I began to wonder: were these people actually good people, forced to do horrible things because of uncontrollable circumstances? Or would they have done horrible things, even as inhabitants of a civilized world in which people do not need to commit cannibalism in order to survive?
Post a Comment