433 Was Definitely Worth No Sleep

Before I get to my actual response, I have to say something.

god doesn't exist.

As logical and rational high school students, we should all be aware of this conclusion. Since I am not aware of the class's religious beliefs, I don't know if this clarification is actually necessary. I mean I assume that everyone recognizes the fallacy of god, but before I begin, I wanted to make it clear. There is no god.

But that doesn't mean religion is useless. In a less sophisticated and scientific world, the men of previous millennia had a decent (I am being very generous here, I know) reason to suspect the existence of a god. Their entire lives were shaped by religion and religious scripture. A lot of the ideas and stories that were told by the church became universally understood. They became a part of our culture (I'm not saying that this is a good thing, but that it did happen). And so biblical allusions carry the significance throughout society even to this day because people understand the sentiment behind the allusion. I mean snakes have become a symbol of deception just because of the story of Adam and Eve. This is why religion is still relevant in our lives today. The ideas of religion are so universally known that people can use them to create symbols and references that enhance literature. It's like TV. Shows like the Jersey Shore, which are complete trash, still hold some minute ounce of relevance in our society because it allows people to discuss New Jersey and it's lovely inhabitants on a common level of knowledge.

Okay. That's over. Now let's start the actual response. I actually don't think that Schaub or McCarthy are talking about traditional religion. Shaub's essay begins with a synthesis of multiple American novel that all deal with finding meaning in life. The Moviegoer pessimistaically states, "the signs of the world make no difference". He includes a quote from Housekeeping (which is probably why Parrish chose the essay) where Ruth comments, "that things were held in place, are held in place, by a web of words." And most fittingly, Schaub uses the quote: "If we did not pretend to believe these things, the world would collapse".

This last quote is the idea that Schaub is conveying in his essay about The Road. If the father and son do not maintain human civilization and morality, if they do not "carry the fire" (ugh), the world will collapse. Life as we know it would fall apart and cease to exist. Schaub's interpretation is one with which McCarthy would agree. The world of The Road lacks any sense of civilization or kindness. Someone once said that "the measure of civilization is extent to which people go to help each other". Then what kind of civilization is the road? Thus, the survival of the father and son and their refusal to not "eat people" represent the preservation of the entire code of human morality, in a world that is falling apart.

Schaub argues that "The Road is an allegory of spiritual survival". And that the "spiritual end that must be reached" is finding a community of survivors on the coast and preserving humanity. And because the boy is the best hope for this survival of the human spirit, Schaub argues that the purpose of the father's journey, and the "basis for the father's love for his son", is to "affirem and protect his son's life". There are so few people of knowledge and integrity left on the earth that maintaing these values through surviving is of utmost importance.

At one point the narrator depressingly comments that "On this road there are no godspoke men" (and by godspoke McCarthy means men that uphold the virtues that are established by the bible, which are basically just virtues). He continues, "[the godspoke men] are gone and I am left and they have taken with them the world" (32). As one of the only times that first person narration is used, McCarthy draws attention to this line. The father is the only man that is left to prevent the world from collapsing. The men that have died have taken "the world" (i.e. culture, knowledge, and virtue) from this planet. All that is left is the father and the son. This is why it is so important that they don't resort to the theft and cannibalism of those around them. They must preserve the human spirit.

Schaub argues that the "central problem of the novel" is "the status of the ethical, as well as the reason for being, in the face of apparent meaninglessness". The fascination that the boy has with the concept of dying and the torture that the father suffers from the temptation of suicide echo this sentiment. When the boy asks over and over, "Are we going to die?" and when the the reader can feel the father's desperate struggle to keep his son alive, "one may wonder if McCarthy's motive might not exactly be the testing of whether goodness can persist in the face of violence."

And so it becomes clear what the memorable line "each the other's world entire" actually means. For the father, preserving human culture is his greatest task. And he knew that "the child was his warrant" (5) to accomplish this task. "In sustaining his son's breath, he sustains not only his own capacity for life but for some belief in life’s continuance, in the value of life”. And for the son, the father represents the source of the ideals that he must continue to uphold. It is evident throughout the novel that the boy learns so much from the father in terms of survival and life philosophy. The boy continues his father’s goal when he asks the stranger who rescues him if he is “carrying the fire”.