Of all the aspects of this novel that stood out, I think that the McCarthy’s most striking feature was his unique characterization of all the characters. I appreciate this on a number of levels, for he is able to provide an extensive analysis of both the characters and the setting.

In the course of last week’s discussion, we were somewhat skeptical of who to trust: the boy, the man, the narrator himself? It was not quite clear whether any of these choices provided an accurate telling of the journey and the environment in which it took place. But largely, I think it would be safe to say that we could not solely trust any of these characters too much because they were not fully descript, and were rather static in their portrayal of the journey. However, in the latter portion of the novel, this trend is highly transformed.

We see that both the man and the boy are portrayed in much fuller extent. Their characters and personalities develop with each scene, mostly because interactions between them and those with other characters become much more frequent. Indeed, the more people they encountered or tried to steer away from, the more insight we were given into the nature of their characters. As they passed by the dead bodies in multiple scenes, we witness new growth in the boy. Although he still asks about the origin of these bodies and questions their ill fate, he is notably less inquisitive than earlier on in the novel. After their encounter with the man who attempts to steal their cart, the boy is left distraught. When he expresses worry about the thief’s death, the father reassures him that “he is not the one who has to worry about this”. And yet, the boy responds to this saying, “Yes, I am. I am the one.” Upon first glance, perhaps some would interpret this to mean that the boy is still just as sensitive to the atrocities that he is witnessing. But we learn from his response that the boy is burdened with internal responsibility, and thus, exhibits signs of growth. The encounter with the man who shoots the arrow at the man continues to force maturity upon the boy. Moreover, seeing the headless baby cooking on the coal was an even greater thrust of brutality upon the boy.

With all these instances, the boy reveals that he is certainly not as naive as we perceived him to be in the former portion of the novel. His increasing quietness and loss of hope and dreams helps convey the post-apocalyptic themes that prevail all throughout McCarthy’s text. We contemplated the role of dreams and inquired whether a postapocalyptic world can bear any dreams at all. This particular question could not be explained by the father, as he had already lived through the past, and knew that the current situation carried no signs of hope or idealism. Although the boy may have been hopeful and overcome with innocence in the beginning, he too has been privy to the harsh and dark ways of human nature in this harsh and dark world. He acknowledges the ideals of the stories that his father tells him, which always incorporate them helping others. However, this does not prove to be the case for they end up hurting many in their fight for survival as the novel proceeds. In an environment that embeds so much paranoia and self- preservation, how can dreams ever really exist? If they dream of anything, it is to be safe in a world that embodies the safety, beauty, and humanity of the idyllic past. As we already pointed out, the past was clearly not so ideal, considering its doom and failure. Thus, we can attest that whatever dreams the man might have been holding on to are both out of time and out of place.

The characteristics of the setting also grow notably as the novel progresses. The road becomes more and more deathlike and all forms of life (trees, swamps, moss) are repeatedly rendered dead. It seems as though McCarthy keeps reiterating the death of these natural forms to mimic the impending death of the father.

“Perhaps in the world’s destruction it would be possible at last to see how it was made. The ponderous counterspecctacle of things ceasing to be. The sweeping waste, hydroptic and coldly secular. The silence.” (274)

I cannot help but relate this to the relationship between the man and the son. Only with the father’s death, are we left focusing on the destiny of the boy and where the road will take him. This ending, one can argue, allows us to envision the world how it was once made, how a people had once come to be. Although we, as readers, are rooting for the father and son to make it out alive and start the world anew (much like the family in Apocalypto), McCarthy does not give us this satisfaction. He only lets the boy continue with new people. It may be that the bond between the father and son was limiting the process of rebuilding and starting a new world. They could not associate with anyone because they had to look out for themselves. Now the boy is with the new family, they may pick up others along the way. It may be a bit of a stretch, but this chain reaction could ultimately lead to civilization, providing some sense of hope in this world after all. If this is the case, we learn that any sense of hope must be totally obliterated in this postapocalypse before it can be renewed again.