The secret being held from the readers by the author is at the end of the book when the father dies and the little boy went off with the family. The book ends without telling us what ever happened to the little boy and if he ended up with the good people or the bad people. The boy says to the man "How do i know if your the good guys or not?" The man then states, "You dont. You'll have to take a shot." We do not know if the boy ended up survivng or if the people ended up eating him. There are clues that suggest that the people he is with now are not bad people. The man kept his word to the little boy by covering a blanket over the boys father. The man also had an oppurtunity to eat the man after he died which he did not do.
This secret is similar to the other secret from The Road (not knowing what happened in the disaster) in the sence that the author is hiding something from us in both circumstances. We are left in the end of the book not knowing what happened to the child and not knowing what caused the disaster.
I do not think the secret is significant but it does leave the readers with a lot of questions the book never told us. The secret is open to interpretation. There are clues that lead us to believe certain things but we never know for sure what really happened.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree with Rose because I feel that the whole book left us wondering, so why should the end be any different. For example we never knew exactly what happened to the mom all we were told is that she left and we assume that she killed herself. Also we were never told what the disaster was. All we were told was about a flash of light and a loud noise which makes us believe that there was some type of explosion. The book provides multiple times when the reader is left guessing and I feel we do not need the information that is kept secret. That is what makes this book so entertaining and you constantly wondering.
The whole book is about the human instinct to have hope. There are so many unanswered questions that the reader is forced to fill in the blanks, but you are much more likely to think that the boy went on to live with the new group of people. As a reader I want to believe that maybe sunshine didn't come out and the birds started singing, but at least humanity continued. There's not too much of a reason to believe this. The people are happy to see him, that only gives a little hope and a lot more speculation. But throughout the book we're taught to read signs. Remember the different situations of breaking into basements. People can not survive forever on scavenging alone, without sunlight sooner or later the stores of leftover food will run out and with nothing new growing, it's the end of the road.
I agree with Rose about the reader not needing to know exactly what happened in the end of the novel to understand the book. The novel was about survival and the bond between a man and his son that kept the two of them going. The entire novel left us beggin after every word for more information but we never got it. I feel that each person had to understand the novel in their own way and come up with their own conclusions. For example, we don't know why the world is the way it is and we are therefore left thinking about what could have happened. As we get clues, our opions change but out questions are never really answered and I think that the way he ended the novel was perfect for the overal feel of the story and having the fate of the boy given to us would spoil the book.
I think that it is a great point that the secret of the book is open to interpretation. One of the main characterisitics of this novel is the quality of being extremely vague and simple text, conversation, and action. That is the great aspect, however; the reader is able to read as far into any one thing that they so desire. I think that at the end, as was stated, there is sufficient evidence that the boy was in good hands. When he asks how is he supposed to know if the new family are the good guys or not and the man that the boy will just have to trust him, I believe that, really, if the family were the bad guys, he would've stated matter-of-fact that they were the good guys-- they wouldn't want to boy to be able to trust his own instincts, only them.
I think this book holds many things back from the reader, not necessarily all secrets, but just not given information. This is all significant, the information the author keeps from us, or doesn't develop or know himself for that matter. It makes the story exactly what it sets out to be-- a long journey not knowing exactly where you lie or what lies ahead. This is the whole point of the book, as a novel it never loses this zest.
Post a Comment