Key Episode 6- The theft of the man and boy's belongings

Key Episode 6- The theft of the man and boy's belongings

Within this episode, the collision of the characters moralistic attitudes creates confusion for the reader as they are unsure on whose morality is justified.  The father is beginning to see a development of maturity within his son; he asks him to stop watching him eat but the father didn’t which could mean that he is unable to let him go.  When they discover that their things have been taken, the father immediately blames himself and there is a large indication of panic as he lists all of the objects almost in disbelief.  He asks the boy to help, he is beginning to rely on him and when the boy finds a clue to where the thief has ventured, the father praises him “good work”. They work together to find it which contrasts to the previous episodes in the book as the father has always been the dominant one who works; we begin to see a development in the strength of the boy.  Tragically, one part that stood out for me was how the father struggles to run and keeps on “leaning over and coughing”. The son can directly see the father’s weakness which strikes me as something shocking and would make the boy worry towards losing his father more however this is often hidden when focusing on moments of action instead.   The relief of finding the trolley is abruptly cut short when McCarthy reinforces how the father has no trust towards anyone. The theme of good and bad becomes confused, as through the boys “wide-eyes” he cannot understand how his father a “good guy” could do this to someone and effectively kill them.   The boy’s innocence is extenuated as he stands crying and even after they walk away he cannot reign in his emotions as he doesn’t understand why they can’t “just help him”.  An insight towards the boy from the father when he says “ I am scared” is surprising as he is finally sharing his emotions to the son to try and make him understand that the father only wants the boy to survive and without their belongings, they would have died,“ Yes I am, he said. I am the one”. 

The reader is left questioning whether the man’s actions are truly justifiable as surely when they have found others belongings, they have taken them in order to provide for their own survival. The father doesn't see anything else, other than the crime that the thief has committed of effectively sacrificing a little boys life for his own.  The theme of threat invokes the man’s actions with the mention of a “boot print” which leads to the man picking up the “pistol” his only source of protection.  The father becomes almost wild and the irregularity of the sentences reflects the irregularity of his thought process as he is overcome by anger.  The dysphemistic expression of “blow your brains out” is horrific, the importance of the belongings is essential to their survival.  When the boy questions, “Are we going to kill them?” there is an indication of tension between the man and the boy, the boy could even be afraid of his father.  I feel that the reference to “near dark” could signify a death approaching which adds to the tension as we are unsure whether it will be theirs or the thieves and there is a strong sense of insecurity.

McCarthy’s use of the word “thief” implies that the father instantly brands this human as someone who has threatened them and committed a serious crime that would have lead to their deaths. When they approach the thief, he holds a “butchers knife” giving connotations of slaughter and there is a link back to the horror scene of finding the mutilated people as his hand is a “fleshy spatula”; he needs help.  The description of the thief as “scrawny” with “stinking rags” is demeaning and animal-like which made me question whether McCarthy used this language to provoke the reader to feel sorry for the thief? He is the epitome of this post-apocalyptic world and if there is “no place for him” is there any place for anyone?  The thief “looked at the boy” pleading for help yet he drops his weapon when “what he saw was very sobering to him”.  I feel that when the thief saw the little life of the boy, he realised the boy deserved to live and that is why he didn't run; this is particularly tragic and when he is left alone, freezing I began to question whether he really was a bad character.