Unlike his interactions with strangers, Christopher started out trusting his father but as time went on he lost that trust.. Christopher was able to forgive his father even though he lied to him. Christopher’s father lied to him about killing Wellington and after that Christopher lost all his trust in his father. He didn’t even feel safe around his father. “That meant he could murder me, because I couldn’t trust him, even though he had said “trust me” because he had told a lie about a big thing.” Christopher runaway from home to find his mother and live with her because he could no longer trust his father. When he was on the train he was trying to figure out where he could live, but he refused to go back home. He was too afraid of his father and what his father might do to him. When Christopher and his mother packed up and left her house in London she tells Christopher that he is going back home. Christopher, being afraid of his father, refuses to talk to him or even acknowledge him. He went straight up to his room puts a dresser in front of his door and studied for his A level math test. Slowly, Christopher begun to get more and more comfortable with his father. His mother encouraged Christopher to listen to what his father had to said and eventually Christopher argued. His father apologized for lying to him and asked Christopher to learn trust him again. Christopher had gained enough independence to make his own decisions and he
When the side conflict arose when strangers were met, it was the son’s emotional compass that drove such conflicts. When the son was driven away from the other boy he saw, his empathy and fear for the boy is what drove his break down and repeated question, “What about the little boy? What about the little boy? What about the little boy?”(86) The tension caused by the son’s empathy for the other boy, and the fathers ultimate concern for his son is what prompted this conflict. The boy’s innocent empathy towards others was another facet of the plot that underlined the entire book. Its queer connotation in terms of the context drove the plot along. When another stranger named Ely was met, it was the boy’s empathy that drove his father to feed the old stranger. Ely would ask, “Why did he do it?” (172) and question a giving character in a very selfish world. His father would respond “You wouldn’t understand…I’m not sure I do.” The conflicting, and in the proposed status quo, radical helping nature of the boy really added a lot to the story. The relatable innocent character would highlight the darker aspects of the book, while all the same show the value of good. This aspect of the son’s emotional and youthful divergence is a prerequisite to many of the themes in the novel such as selfishness, love, and survival. The more moral character in the son is what allowed the novel to have a more
This is when the idea of a "duel personality" comes into picture. The father can almost see himself as a child, doing the things he wished his son would do. When he was young he would get up especially early to fix his fishing pole and even help set the dinner table. Then he realizes that his son doesn't do any of these things, making the father feel as if the trip just isn't the same.
The essay goes into great detail of his relationship with his father. He describes his father as cruel (65), bitter (65), and beautiful (64). He does mention the bad in length. On the flip side, he tells us some of the good as well. Throughout his storytelling, the reader gets a glimpse into his life and the way he feels. His feelings evolve during the extent of the essay.
Christopher decided to find his father, he didn’t have a good relationship with him but he tried. He tried helping him even though he saw him as a stranger. When he found him, his father was already sober and had a new family. It took them time to figure out how to work things out, even though Christopher knew that he would never be able to see him as a father like figure, he at least knew he could build a small relationship with him and his
The narrator and his father have the kind of relationship where on the surface it might come off as cold because they’re reserved and don’t openly share thoughts and emotions but, underneath it all, the narrator must feel some respect for his father because he still contemplates over the advice his father gave him.
Story A story is not like a novel; it can be a true story because this can happen in everyone’s life. The family love is one lesson for every single family. In every family, there should be a strong connection between parents and children, especially fathers should give time for their children. love of a family, the waylesson that fathers parents teachshould teach for their children about life is also another lesson from this story. Fathers know more about life because they will pass many challenges when they were teenagers, so fathers must tell to their children about life challenges.,, and the struggle that children make to succeed their dreams are the parts of the story that the author tried to transfer for the audiences. Children should work hard to fulfill their dreams and to have a better life and job. Scott explains his idea clearly for his audience. Develop each supporting body paragraph point in one sentence each to develop this conclusion. Also, endeavor to end on a resounding, powerful final
The father and the boy have a co-dependant relationship. The boy is dependent on his father for survival, while the father lives to ensure the survival of the boy. When the boy asks “What would you do if I died?” The father responds with, “If you died I would want to die too” (McCarthy, 11). It is clear that his love for the child is what motivates him to do everything he can to ensure the boys survival. This motivates him to teach the boy strong morals and skills to help him live as a “good guy.” After finding and humiliating the thief that stole all their belongings, the father and son
In this case, Christopher had to forgive and trust his father after he found out that he had killed Wellington. When Christopher found out that Mr Boone killed Wellington, he was very scared, which was one of the reasons that he ran away from Swindon to go to London to live with his mother. Mr Boone tries really hard to gain Christopher’s trust once again and make amends. An example of this is seen when Christopher and Ms Boone moved back to Swindon, and Mr Boone tries to gain Christopher’s trust by creating a “project” that he and Christopher have to complete. Mr Boone explains, “‘Let’s call it a project. A project we have to do together. You have to spend more time with me. And I...I have to show you that you can trust me. And it will be difficult at first because... because it’s a difficult project. But it will get better. I promise.’” (Haddon 219) This directly shows that Mr Boone is trying really hard to gain Christopher’s trust again and make their relationship strong as it used to be. By doing so, Mr Boone also gives Christopher a gift, to act like a peace token. The book states, “Then he came back through and gave me the dog. And he said, ‘He’s two months old. And he’s a golden retriever.’” (Haddon 219) When Mr Boone did this, it was a way for him to gain Christopher’s trust since he killed Wellington the dog, by giving Christopher his very own golden retriever. This acted as a peace offering to bring Christopher and his father together once again and to gain his trust. This sets the notion in the book that there is hope within the family for them to be repaired and to be loving family once
Theme is an integral part of this story and is mostly presented through the narrator. One of the major themes of the story is conscience, in which many of the conflicts in the
Conflict was used effectively in the short story to reveal the theme of the story. The boy has an internal conflict about which parent to stay with, and because his father left, he seemed to have favored him. He wanted him back so badly that every night, he watches him on the six o’clock news while wearing his old jackets. He was blinded by his father’s sudden departure that he forgot about what is really important. Additionally, another development in the short story’s conflict has been used effectively to reveal the theme. When the boy went to Macdonald’s to see his father’s true colors, he thought: “I finished my drink quickly, thankful that he had to be back in the studio for the news.” By the time he saw his dad for the first time in a while, he knew he was not the man he thought he was. At that moment, he also realized that he lost sight of what he had all this time: His mother’s unconditional love. If it wasn’t for the characterization of
Next, Through Christopher's understanding of relationships, Haddon unveils the reality of the idealistic thoughts of normality in society. Society thinks a relationship is to mutually love and respect and trust one another. It’s considered “normal” to show affection if you care for someone. Christopher has an inability to express his feelings of love. "And Father said, 'Christopher do you understand that I love you?' And I said 'Yes', because loving someone is helping them when they get into trouble, and looking after them, and telling the truth,” (87) Despite the normality society has put on relationships, every person has their own opinion on how a relationship works. The normality of relationships is only an ideal standard. Contrary to what most believe as a typical relationship, some don’t express their thoughts and feelings in the same way. Haddon shows his readers that just because there are standards to what a relationship should be like, doesn’t mean everyone has to abide by those standards. The love Christopher's parents have for him is one- sided, they can’t expect him to feel the same way. (The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time). Normality is a standard and the standard society has on relationships are unattainable considering all people are different.
Then, the story goes to express the changes the father-in-law has experiences and how contrasting is his past with his present. He apparently is being affected by an undefined condition, which has made him change in temper and personality. During several moments, the narrator’s father-in-law presents issues of insecurity and some aggressiveness, and in others, he delights the family with the appearance of a sudden charismatic behavior. At some point, the narrator and her husband, after a brief discussion, recognize their responsibility as children to take future care of their parents. The narrator reveals at the end the acknowledge of her father-in-law permanent change in character and how much it affects them. Jen’s central idea relates how there is a cyclical change in family roles and responsibilities between sons and elder parents that naturally repeats itself. It also suggests that when issues are presented, the duties can be overwhelming for the new
In conclusion, the two speakers have common feelings and morals that have changed as they have aged. The granddaughter who once was her grandmother's secured possession and learned about the faith that her grandmother had taught her changed when she got into the real world. Likewise, the son who never realized that his father worked hard to provide his family comfort changed him as he became more mature, this leads him to realize that he made a mistake by not thanking his father. Overall both of the speaker's morals and feelings change as they grow up and realize the change they are going through and the regrets both have from not being able to tell their loved ones of what they have learned.