The Road

During class today we touched on the topic of the true humanity of the father. I think that this idea could be explored further because many people seemed to have a lot of thought and opinion on the subject. I personally feel that the father did what he felt necessary to save his son, and yes, somethings were not good, but he was not behaving as many of the others. We can analyze what the father did but none of us could really say because we haven't come close to experiencing what they go through in the novel. He would have killed himself if it wouldn't have been for his son. If he hadn't made some of this choices he did, his son might not have survived.

Also, as we said in class, religion played a huge role throughout the novel, and can be interpreted in so many ways because McCarthy left the theme very ambiguous. I did get the sense that the boy represented God or holiness because he seems like the main ray of goodness and hope throughout the novel. He always wanted to help those that they came across even though they could not be helped. The father told the boy that they couldn't help, but it wasn't a selfish decision because they wouldn't be able to live if they gave their resources to others. Also, ironically, the father sacrificed himself for his son. Their relationship and religion are intertwined throughout the entire novel and are important themes throughout.

The Road

The Road was by far my favorite novel we read all year.  I fell in love with Cormac McCarthy's style of writing.  Although the majority of the book was quite depressing,  I still quite enjoyed reading it.  One of the main questions that I thought about while reading(this also became the topic for my paper) is the idea of keeping compassion in times of suffering.  There is evidence for both keeping and losing this compassion in the book.  The father and the son are juxtaposed in this respect.  The father survives entirely by instinct and in some cases ruthlessness, but I would not say he is bereft of joy.  He still finds happiness in his beloved son.  His acute awareness of what they must do to survive could stem from his imminent condition of death that he tried to keep from his son, or his desire to see his son safe before he passes away.  The son is not as aware of these troubles, so perhaps he can more afford to be lenient and merciful.  He has never even known a better world than this, so it may come as a surprise that he can still attempt to save others when in his world people are always the enemy.  Both ways of dealing with their circumstance can be defended because boht are necessary.  Without the compassion that the boy still has, life ceases to be worth living, but without the father's necessary cruelty in some cases there would be no living.  Their struggle for survival is the main plot point of the book.  

Another interesting aspect of the book was the interaction between the father and his son.  The father seems to want to hide many of the cruelties of the world from his young son, but his ability to do this slowly declines throughout the book as his belief in their eventual triumph fades and his illness worsens.  He stops providing as much encouragement and faces him with the bare truth that, yes, the men are coming to kill them and sometimes they must kill or be killed.  

The father feels as if he must show the boy the horrors of the world in order for him to survive, and this is not altogether a false conception.  

The Long and Winding Road G/A G/A

So, just to start out with, I don't know if any of you are Beatles fan but the title of this post is taken from their song and the G/As that follow is what is immediately played after those lyrics, so yeah, just making sure everyone knew what I was doing with that.

It has been a very long time that I have read a book that I could not put down. Most books I have read since about mid high school have been required for class and many of them, if not all of them, felt like chores rather than something I would enjoy doing. I went all day without eating when I was reading this book for two reasons: I couldn't force myself to stop reading, it was just too perfect of an experience and I was so caught up in the father and son's plight that I felt it was only right to join them in their starvation.

Anyway, I could honestly go on hours and hours about exactly how much I loved this novel but I do not feel like that is the point of these posts. So to get down to it.

To begin with, the way that McCarthy paints the picture of the post apocalyptic world made the novel the most believable post apocalyptic story I have ever read or seen. So how is it exactly that he is able to pull this off so well. From what I can tell, it has to do with two key writing elements. The first obviously being just his ability to describe everything so eloquently and poetically. His language is remarkable, beautiful, and I dont think that anyone could really contest that. Anyway, the other thing that he does that is so blatant, is that he tells you only what the main characters know and sometimes not even that much. He gives none of the characters names. He doesnt tell how the world got to be in the state that it is in, though he alludes to it when the man is remembering the day that it all happened as well as in the end when the bearded man with the shotgun was described as a veteran. Overall though, you are given no knowledge of anything, except what the boy and the man run across on their journey. The main point of the journey is not even revealed. The man keeps on talking about the boy carrying the fire, and the man seems to think that the child is heaven sent as a prophet or something of this manner. McCarthy never tells you though. WHERE they are is never revealed. It could be argued that they are in America and are traveling down the Eastern Coast, but where on the Eastern Coast, and where is this South? Is it the American South or is the man talking more Mexico/Central America?

All of this ambiguity bugged me for the longest time. I kept reading hoping that something would be revealed. Eventually I realized that it wasnt going to happen and it drove me crazy. Why did McCarthy do this? In my personal opinion, after I thought back on it, this book is not about the end of the world, nor is it about the specifics of the journey of the two characters, nor is it about the race of man. This book is a story about the love between a father and his son. Nothing else in the world matter to those two characters so why should McCarthy spend anytime describing anything else? The environment, and their basic needs were the only things that were described in detail other than their general emotions. The environment and their basic needs played a huge roll in their lives so McCarthy called attention to this.

Brilliant.

This novel is a testimony to the human condition. I believe that McCarthy is saying with this novel that no matter what man is put through, no matter what he should endure, and no matter how much evil walks amongst him, there will always be some good, some hope. McCarthy paints a picture of the absolute worst environment imaginable. He paints a picture of a burnt and decaying world populated by cannibals and monsters that would just as soon rape and eat children. He tells a story of a world that has lost all that is good, and yet a child that is wholy good is born of this horror. A child that grows up never experiencing anything other than brutality and the basest of the human condition, can still see the light in the world. The sun is blocked by the ash of man's doing and the child can still see the light in the world. It is an amazing book.

The entire time I was expecting a No Country for Old Men ending throughout the entire length of the novel. When I finally got there I was relieved. McCarthy wrote the most beautiful ending to any book I have ever read. The fire that the boy was carrying was not extinguished, and his father's pilgrimage across the land was not in vain.

I really don't know what else to say right now. There are far too many things circulating around in my head to pin anything else down. I am very interested in what everybody else will have to say about this.

"Maps and mazes. Of a thing which could not be put back. Not be made right again. In the deep glens where they lived all things were older than man and they hummed of mystery."

The Road - Questions to Get You Thinking

Wow, where to start with this book? This book was a lot like “Never Let Me Go” because I couldn’t turn the page fast enough to try and figure out what was going on. Like in “Never Let Me Go,” the more we read the more we find out, but in the end we are still deprived of the information that we want so badly. McCarthy spends so much time just describing the everyday activities of their lives (granted it is no the “everyday” things of our lives). Even though this book is a lot about the routine in their lives, there is some very powerful writing in it. One of my favorite example was the bottom paragraph on page 130 starting with the sentence “He walked out in the gray light…” I have a lot of things to talk about from this book but I want to propose some questions for you to think about while you read:
1) Is this a Christian parable? What connections can you draw? Obviously, this is a post-apocalyptic novel and the Bible has a whole book devoted to that. But past that, what do you see?
2) Is this a morality story? What morals do we learn? The boy seems to always want to help people but the father is more reluctant to do so. Is the father callous? Immoral? Selfish?

Now think about some of the motifs/trends in this book:
-The motif of dreams. Dreams are mentioned many, many times in this book, especially towards the end. What do each characters have to say about good dreams and about bad dreams?

-Tied closely to the theme of dreams, the father has a line where he says “What you can put in your head you can never take out.” To what extent does the father try to protect his son from seeing some of the atrocities and why does he do it? I think this applies to the reader as well. McCarthy is creating an image in our head that we will always remember

-The relationship between the father and the son – the boy seems to be growing apart from his father even though his father has only the best intentions in mind. After his father confronts the man who stole their cart on the beach, the father says to the son “You’re not the one who has to worry about everything” and the son replies defiantly “I am the one.” Do you think they grow apart because the son disapproves of his father’s interaction with other people, or do you think this is just part of the boy growing and maturing (we all went through a phase where we got annoyed by our parents)

What other comments did everyone have about the book? Did you like it? Were you frustrated by it? Go to this website and look at the screenshots from the movie coming out and I think you will really like it. It helps put a visual on some of the most memorable scenes

http://the-road--trailer.blogspot.com/

The Road

I enjoyed reading The Road, despite the depressing storyline. Normally I like happy endings, something which this class has a shortage of. One thing that stood out to me was how McCarthy matched diction and syntax to the tone of the book. Set after a worldwide catastrophe, maybe a nuclear fallout, the book maintains a bleak, almost apathetic view towards the end. McCarthy only gives one character in the book a name, referring to the main characters as “the man” and “the boy.” The only named character, a hobo that the man and the boy meet on the road, gives them a fake name because he “doesn’t want them to be able to use [his real name].” The sentences are concise and to the point, not using much figurative language, because the characters focus on the facts and staying alive. In syntax, McCarthy doesn’t use apostrophes in his contractions, which fits in with the book’s hopeless air. Why bother using apostrophes when it’s the end of the world?
I found the relationship between the man and the boy interesting. Both try and keep their humanity and morality in the face of a harsh world. The man is forced to be calculating and sometimes cruel to ensure his family's survival. The boy, in spite of the fact that he is used to an existence of cold and hunger, is idealistic and compassionate, always wanting to help others. Unlike the man, the boy reaches out to people they meet on their travels, and volunteers to do without to give others more of a chance to survive. He is upset by the man’s actions to protect his family, from shooting the cannibal to taking everything back from the thief on the beach, including his clothes.
I wondered what thoughts people had about the phrase “carrying the fire,” that the man and the boy use to describe themselves. I thought it symbolized carrying the torch of humanity, or maybe the morality that most of the human race has lost--hence the man's separation of the remaining population into "the good guys" and "the bad guys". I thought it was interesting that “the fire” is one of the few images with a color connotation in the novel. A lot of the description in the novel deals with gray and black ash, and the gray refugees and cannibals.

I was a little hesitant about this novel when we first started because I had never read a graphic novel before and I was not a comic book fan as a child. I was surprised that I actually enjoyed the layout of the book. It was entertaining to pair the dialogue with the pictures. That is definitely a major thing I have gotten out of this class; expanding my book genres. Although I was not as big of a fan with the content of the novel as the format, it was still an engaging read.

Alison's relationship with her father was definitely the main pillar of this novel to me. She seemed to have a love-hate relationship with him. For one thing he was the same as her in a way. They shared this bond of homosexuality, that however present it was in her mind, always seem to exist there. For example, they shared a love for men's clothing. It was quite entertaining to see Alison and her father picking out his outfits together. Alison's hatred for female clothing was apparent as well. Interestingly this is the one thing they really discuss when they have their conversation about Alison "coming out" in their car ride. Her father admitted to dressing in girls' clothes as a child and she exclaimed, "I wanted to be a boy! I dressed in boys' clothes!" This is a funny way for them to relate. Do you think this was because it was a concrete, tangible example that they both could bring up?

Alison's father's love for books was ever present in this story as well. He literally based his entire life around them. For some reason it made his character more likable I feel. Did anyone else feel this way? I mean in the real world if you heard about a man engaging in activities with underage boys it would be very difficult to find him at all a likable character. His disillusioned love for these fictional characters though gave his craziness a breeding place at least. It also gave Alison and her father another reason to bond. Even after Alison was annoyed with her father's interest in her English class in college, she later admitted to missing it. Also, it was Alison's father who gave her Colette to read. She later asked him if he did this on purpose, which he said he was not conscience of.

Another thing I just wanted to throw out there for opinion was Alison's relationship with her siblings. I found it so odd that she did not mention her siblings more. Most children are highly influenced by their brothers and sisters. They typically share a lot of memories with them and they form each other's character. Alison hardly mentioned them though. Do you think there was a reason for this? Were they just not important figures in her life?

Last I want to touch on the end of the story. The very last page ties back to Alison's relationship with her father. I think this last page illustrates what Alison's father meant to her. Yes, he did end up dying, giving up. At the same time though, while he was around, their stories intertwined and he was there for Alison. He grew up in a very different time, where going to Gay rallies and dances and meeting at the Union in college was not as acceptable. He hid his true self. Alison on the other hand was able to free herself and be who she really was. I think in a weird, twisted way he helped her do that and she is acknowledging this at the end of the story. Any thoughts?

Graphic Novel – Sexuality – Death

Is this a graphic novel or a comic book? Being a comic book geek while growing up, I was really excited when I realized that we had to read one for the class. Though once I started reading it, it didn’t exactly feel like a comic, but more like a graphic novel. Comics for the most part do not make you think too much, and pretty much spoon feeds the entire book for the reader without having to strain the brain. Graphic novels such as Fun Home clearly do not qualify for such a description of a comic book, as the reader is forced to read between the lines to be able to figure the theme and story of the book. Additionally this book does not follow a chronological order. That combined with a difficult structure of the character’s conversations, makes this more of a novel than a comic book.

A major theme in the book is sexuality, especially around the concept of homosexuality. Sometimes it is difficult to see why the author illustrates very graphic sexual ideas and images which might be offensive to many readers. Is this really needed or what is Bechdel exactly trying to portray with these images? It almost seems like she is taking a risk by putting the readers outside of their comfort zone by utilizing these images, while the purpose may not be exactly clear.

Through sexuality, Bechdel does question and show how people discover their own sexual preferences. For example, the father is a closeted homosexual, as Bechdel found out later in her life, and the examples from his army and school days clearly portrays his homosexuality early. On a similar note, at a comparatively young age the narrator tries to figure out her sexuality, especially by reading books. It seems to show that it is during adolescence that most people figure or try to figure out their sexuality, but only some might be ready to openly accept theirs. Though in this case, the time period the father grew up in, was far more conservative than the narrator’s time. Also, Bechdel shows that discovering one’s sexuality can be very complex and is a mixture of many other things which might surprise readers. In this novel we see that loving art and literature, the way a home is made, and even the history of the family all can play into one’s discovery of their sexuality.

Another major theme of the book is the concept of death and irony. The readers are introduced to the “fun home” which is short for funeral home, a bit ironic type of statement. Funeral home is obviously related to death, but it is made into fun home. Also, the father works at the funeral home, and when he dies, the narrator thinks it is ironic that he will be having a funeral there. She is also trying to find the reason of his death, was it suicide, why suicide, was it artistic, was it because she told him about her sexuality and found out his, or was it a complete accident.