The Road
by Cormac McCarthy
“He pushed the cart and both he and the boy carried knapsacks. In the knapsacks were essential things in case they had to abandon the cart and make a run for it. Clamped to the handle of the cart was a chrome motorcycle mirror that he used to watch the road behind them. He shifted the pack higher on his shoulders and looked out over the wasted country. The road was empty. Below in the little valley the still grey serpentine of a river. Motionless and precise. Along the shore a burden of dead reeds. Are you okay? He said. The boy nodded. They set out along the blacktop in the gunmetal light, shuffling through the ash, each the other’s world entire.” (McCarthy, 2006, p.4)
Exercise 1
The Road has an omniscient narrator. Rewrite a few of the lines using a different type of narrator:
First person:
‘Clamped to the handle of the cart was a chrome motorcycle mirror that I used to watch the road behind them. I shifted the pack higher on my shoulders and looked out over the wasted country.’
Second person:
‘ Clamped to the handle of the cart was a chrome motorcycle mirror that you had used to watch the road behind us. Then, you shifted the pack higher on your shoulders and looked out over the wasted country. ‘
If McCarthy had chosen the third person limited point of view, think about the difference between telling this story from the boy’s POV or the man’s.
Narrating from a third person limited point of view would focus on the individual’s experiences, thoughts and opinions.
This method of narrating allows the reader to be an observer, outside of all the characters but with an empathy towards the main character.
Unlike being in first/ second person, narrating in third person can explain details that the main character may not know. It can explain things outside of the character’s awareness and storyline, to build a bigger picture in the view of the reader.
If it was told from the boy’s point of view, the understanding of events would be different due to his lack of experience and knowledge. However, the boy may also have more of an open mind to possibilities because, unlike an adult, his mind is less restrained by logic.
The man’s point of view would have the added element of responsibility, as he has a child to protect. This adds more of an emotional perspective.
The reader would be more likely an adult themselves, and would therefore relate to the man’s current emotions and thoughts. However telling the story from the boy’s perspective could make the reader themselves more protective and considerate.
The boy’s perspective is a more difficult style to write in, because the writer needs to adopt an unfamiliar attitude and still explain the story to the reader.
What impact does changing the narrative angle have on the story? Why do you think McCarthy decided to use an omniscient narrator?
The narrative can depend on the writer’s audience, and what story they want to tell the audience. Changing the narrative can change the perspective of the story being told, for example it could be about the hero or be the hero telling their own story.
I think McCarthy used an omniscient narrator because he wanted an impartial and detached way of telling the story, but also he is able to play with the narrator’s intentions, for example there is more freedom to create plot twists, an unreliable narrator, or even someone who is telling a story they are part of.
Using a third person narrator, McCarthy can explain the events in perhaps a less emotive way, giving the reader the capacity to respond to the story naturally. For example rather than a first person telling the reader about how they felt, the omniscient narrator can explain what's happening to the character and that gives the readers a way to interpret the emotions.
Exercise 2
‘He’, the man, and ‘the boy’ are nameless. Why? Does their anonymity change the way we feel about the characters? Can we still care about them without names? Do they still have an identity without a name?
I believe that their lack of names reflects their status in the story, emphasising their lost and wandering situation.
Not giving their names gives them a unique identity compared to most stories.
The readers can see the characters as strangers in the narrator’s voice, and see the narrator as an observer.
Names can also add symbology and meaning to the characters, so perhaps McCarthy wanted us to just see the characters, their actions and their story.
I think as a reader, we do care about the characters still. Perhaps we are more sympathetic and intrigued by the fact we don't know their names.
How can we tell they’re in danger? Are they fleeing danger or do they expect to encounter it along the way? What sort of danger? Human? Animal? Elemental?
Within the first sentences, we know the characters are on alert, because they are ready to ‘make a run for it’ with their essentials in their backpacks. This indicates there is a danger they need to run away from, either human or animal.
We also know that they attached a mirror to the cart, so they can have more observation of their surroundings and be able to see danger approaching from behind.
The scene describes ‘gunmetal light’ which means they are likely to be either at dawn or in dusk, so they have the elemental danger of darkness to their disadvantage.
It’s also written that there is ‘wasted country,’ a ‘serpentine river’ and ‘ash’ which indicates that the dangers are likely to be elemental, having to navigate through destruction and wilderness.
The chrome motorcycle mirror tells us the time is roughly contemporary. So what’s happened to the rest of the recognisable contemporary world? Or is the story set in the future? Post-apocalypse maybe?
Given the description of the scene, I'm inclined to believe that the time is possibly post-apocalyptic.
Using a cart as well indicates a more modern time, but not necessarily in the future. There is nothing to suggest any futuristic technology or materials in the excerpt, but if the story was written when motorcycles were fairly new it could be considered futuristic.
They are alone: ‘The road was empty.’ Where is everyone? Why are they scared if no one is around? Because no one is around? Because someone might be around?
Assuming that because there is ash, there has been fire or destruction of some kind. This could mean that buildings have been destroyed and therefore people have been killed.
Also, given that there is wide open wasteland, there is nowhere for anyone to hide? Otherwise why aren't the characters hiding themselves? So others would have possibly fled elsewhere.
Given that the characters are protective of their supplies, I believe they could be afraid of being attacked for the supplies by animals or humans.
There’s been some sort of disaster: ‘wasted country… dead reeds … shuffling through the ash …What sort of disaster might it be?
Ash indicates a fire, or an explosion.
Wasted country and dead reeds describe death and decay of even plant life, so as well as an explosion we could also consider some kind of bomb or chemical.
They’re on a journey with everything they own. Where are they going? Where have they come from?
The excerpt does not indicate the character’s intentions, but given the danger they are in I would say it was a journey they have had to make.
The text does not describe any injury, and both characters are able to communicate and are mobile (as they’d both be able to run after they abandoned the cart), so this indicates they were not present at the scene when the disaster struck, again, as there is also no place to hide.
I’d suggest that they are trying to get somewhere safer for their survival.
The road is mentioned three times in these few lines. It is also the title of the book. What does it symbolise?
The Road is symbolic of the journey the characters face.
The Road could also be symbolic of human civilization, although roads themselves are as old as the Romans, it suggests a more developed human society.
Can you spot any poetic devices in this short passage? What effect do they have?
Alliteration - the ‘motorcycle mirror’, this could be to emphasize that the mirror came from a motorcycle.
The metaphor of the river being ‘grey’ and ‘serpentine’ indicates again the time of day, but also the shape of the river. By choosing a serpent, a.k.a a snake, this also adds the sense of danger to the scene.
There is a rhythm to the text as well, we have long elaborate sentences punctuated by short statement sentences. I think this helps the story to flow and by using short statements, gives the added sense of tension in the scene.
What other stylistic language choices does McCarthy make and why? Why might he not punctuate speech?
The way it’s written is poetic, but still kept to the point.
It’s written almost as notes from the narrator. I think this is why McCarthy didn't punctuate the speech.
Not punctuating the speech could be because we are there in the moment with the narrator, as opposed to the typical way of telling the story.
What features give us a sense of where we are? How does McCarthy create a postapocalyptic world? Would the impact be the same if he were to remove the man and the boy? Look carefully at the imagery, for example the grey ‘serpentine of the river’ and ‘the gunmetal light’. What is it about the choice of metaphor that creates a sense of danger? What does the serpentine symbolise? Think biblical perhaps. What effect will biblical and religious imagery, themes and symbols have in this genre of writing?
As previously mentioned, the grey and gunmetal light suggests a time of dim lighting so either at dusk or at dawn. I'm more inclined to think they are travelling at dusk because of the impending sense of danger.
Without the man and the boy, there is just emptiness and nothingness. We would be looking at the result of whatever happened.
The character’s situation adds excitement and builds tension in the story.
Using the word ‘gunmetal’ suggests war, or battle.
Using the metaphor of the serpent could be religious. The snake in biblical terms is a symbol of evil, which could explain that the destruction was caused by an act of evil, such as war.
The use of a biblical term could also be an indicator that it is post-apocalyptic, and an event of ‘biblical’ proportions. Many religions discuss aspects of the world ending, including christianity.
McCarthy could also be making his views on religion and politics clear in the story by using these metaphorical terms.
• What’s the prose style like? Are the sentences long or short? Are they rhythmic or choppy or stark? What impact does this have? Is the language complex or simple? Often the more dramatic or dark a piece is, the more simple and stripped back the prose. Why might this be? What would be the effect of more flowing, colourful and detailed prose?
The sentences change rapidly from long to short.
The prose is choppy, because it keeps it to the point and gives only the relevant information to the reader.
Elaborating on details gives the reader a sense that there is time to do so, because we can stop and observe the scene and the details of the events. Therefore, keeping the sentences stark and descriptive, yet brief, gives the feel of tension and suspense.
How does it all make you feel?
Initially I was drawn to the character’s situation, I want to know what’s going on and why. After deciphering the text, it feels intense and even gloomy to picture the scenery.
It makes me curious to see if they survive the journey of ‘the road’ and if they face the danger that they are so afraid of.
It gives me a great sense of unease, because of the stillness of the scene. Typically, in stories, there is quiet and suspense before something scary happens!
Comments
Post a Comment