The Road

Introduction

The Road, By Cormac McCarthy is a chilling and frightful story about a father and his son traveling south in a post apocalyptic world. There are a few pointers that may help you to fully appreciate this story.

            First, this story is an allegory. In case you forget, an allegory is a story in which everything is representative of something else. The Road really isn’t a story about a man and his son; rather, it is a story about life today. Each of the characters represents a segment of our society. The father represents those of us who are driven by our goals. The mother represents those of us who simply give up and fade away. As you read the story, try to understand who each character represents.

            Next, the language and usage is somewhat strange. You will notice that there is very little punctuation found in the dialogue. Ask yourself why this would be. Yes, even the lack of punctuation represents something else. McCarthy wasn’t just lazy, he had a reason for not using quotation marks and other commonly used punctuation.

       Don't be fooled into thinking that the story seems to be saying the same thing over and over again; this is not the case. Each event tells us more.

       Finally, you may, at first, hate the ending. Why does it end that way. If you're confused by the ending, think of this, Hope survives even when there is no hope.

       Good luck. Let me know what you think.

1. Why is there almost no punctuation? What does McCarthy, the author intend us to understand by doing this?

2. Why do you think McCarthy has chosen not to give his characters names? How do the generic labels of "the man" and "the boy" affect the way in which readers relate to them?

3. How is McCarthy able to make the postapocalyptic world of The Road seem so real and utterly terrifying? Which descriptive passages are especially vivid and visceral in their depiction of this blasted landscape? What do you find to be the most horrifying features of this world and the survivors who inhabit it?

4. McCarthy doesn't make explicit what kind of catastrophe has ruined the earth and destroyed human civilization, but what might be suggested by the many descriptions of a scorched landscape covered in ash? What is implied by the father's statement that "On this road there are no godspoke men. They are gone and I am left and they have taken with them the world" [p. 32]?

5. As the father is dying, he tells his son he must go on in order to "carry the fire." When the boy asks if the fire is real, the father says, "It's inside you. It was always there. I can see it" [p. 279]. What is this fire? Why is it so crucial that they not let it die?

6. McCarthy envisions a postapocalyptic world in which "murder was everywhere upon the land" and the earth would soon be "largely populated by men who would eat your children in front of your eyes" [p. 181]. How difficult or easy is it to imagine McCarthy's nightmare vision actually happening? Do you think people would likely behave as they do in the novel, under the same circumstances? Does it now seem that human civilization is headed toward such an end?

7. 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"?

8. The sardonic blind man named Ely who the man and boy encounter on the road tells the father that "There is no God and we are his prophets" [p. 170]. What does he mean by this? Why does the father say about his son, later in the same conversation, "What if I said that he's a god?" [p. 172] Are we meant to see the son as a savior?
 

12. Why do you think McCarthy ends the novel with the image of trout in mountain streams before the end of the world: "In the deep glens where they lived all things were older than man and they hummed of mystery" [p. 287]. What is surprising about this ending? Does it provide closure, or does it prompt a rethinking of all that has come before? What does it suggest about what lies ahead?