Cormac McCarthy’s dystopian novel, The Road, effectively utilises narratological techniques and structures to convey complex ideas of the importance of hope, morality versus survival, and the integral role of relationships between humans in surviving extreme circumstances.
An essential component of survival under conditions of great adversity is a drive to survive and a hope for the future. McCarthy’s protagonist knows that his quest to head “to the South” is fruitless; he knows he is going to die “Sometime. Not Now.” However he recognises that without some kind of goal or destination, humanity has no purpose. McCarthy utilises aspects of the symbolic code to illustrate how keeping the boy alive has become the man’s sole purpose for carrying on; he represents his father’s drive and his hope for the future. This is displayed in a synchronic analeptic episode through the contrast between the father’s devotion and the reaction of the mother; “The one thing I can tell you is that you won’t survive for yourself. I know because I would have never come this far.” She cannot place her hope and her motivation to continue in the boy like the father can, and as such succumbs to the world she is a part of. The semantic code is also utilised through the continued reference to fire to further develop how the pair’s hope allows them to survive. The audience associates fire with resilience and spirit, such that when the pair continually discuss how they are “carrying the fire” the reader connects them with possessing the hope and life of all humanity. McCarthy synthesises this association with aspects of the symbolic code in order to show how varying levels of the man’s belief influences the character’s fortunes. Just before finding the crucial food reserves the man says “Hold your hand in front of the flame, don’t let it go out”, implying how fire not only represents the hope of greater humanity, but the singular hope of the man, and how possessing that hope brings him the things he needs to survive. Similarly, near times of great turmoil fire is referenced in a negative light; “he could find no safe place to make a fire” being said before their food runs out and they meet the cannibals, and “he made a dry camp with no fire” after he steals the thief’s clothes, further suggesting how a lack of hope leads to death and depravity. The old man they encounter also remarks how he has “not seen a fire in a long time”, elucidating how he has had no hope up to then, and that it has made him “live like an animal”. These associations made by the audience firmly establish McCarthy’s underlying theme about the integral role of hope in surviving hardship and maintaining humanity’s spirit.
However, surviving under such adverse circumstances invariably results in morally questionable decisions being made. The man and the boy repeatedly reassure each other that they are the “good guys”, repeatedly, especially after having to make difficult decisions regarding others. McCarthy utilises the semantic code in the audience’s association with clear-cut morals of good and bad guys to illustrate how the man plays to the boy’s innocence and purity in order to keep him going. However he also illustrates the moral ambiguity imbued within difficult scenarios. In particular, his dream involving the burning of the serpents conveys how, whilst the father might think he and the boy are lights in the darkness, they are merely going against their own image of evil of not eating others, “having no remedy for evil but only for the image of it as they conceived it to be” rather than actual evil as defined by the reader. This is displayed through the cultural code and biblical allusion, as the serpent is portrayed as the root of all evil in the garden of Eden, connecting this true hidden evil to the man in the reader’s mind. The semantic code is applied once again after the man kills the marauder to demonstrate the moral ambiguity in his actions. The description of the dead raider as “My brother at last” when synthesised with the succeeding portrayal of his “reptilian calculations in those cold and shifting eyes”, connects the father subliminally with the more overt evil of the marauder. Through animal imagery and the semantic code of reptiles McCarthy exacerbates the negative image the reader has of the raider, and then connects this to the man through the cultural connection of brothers, subtly implying his questionable actions. When coupled with the contrast to the boy’s innocent and caring nature, shown through his empathy even for the thief (“He was just hungry papa, he’s going to die”), this association effectively places doubt in the reader’s mind over the man’s morals, and makes them question their own response to a similarly adverse scenario.
Hope, human relationships and the ability to do what is needed are all integral aspects of surviving in adverse settings, and McCarthy demonstrates these essential concepts through the narrative structures and techniques associated with his two protagonists and their surroundings. The contrasting actions, morals and mindsets of the father and son elucidate the deep physical and emotional challenges present in such an environment, resonating with the audience as to how they would cope and resulting in an effective and evocative portrayal of McCarthy’s underlying themes and concerns.