Violence In Mccarthy's Blood Meridian

In Cormac McCarthy’s the road, the author conveys that although there can be despair and bloodshed in the world, love overcomes al l with a little faith. The man views the boy as a symbol for hope and provides the man with game a purpose in life, to protect the boy above all. Violence is the antagonist in the novel because the people are driven into thievery, murder, and cannibalism because of the post-apocalyptic landscape. Food is scarce and people are starving, and consequently, people turn to thievery as a way to fend for themselves. At this point in time, stealing is not a crime anymore. There is no government, there are no regulations, and all is fair. When the man says that he will protect the boy at any cost, it is not an understatement. When a member of a blood cult posed a threat to the boy, the man did not so much as fidget to reach the safety of his weapon. Without overthinking, the man shot the degenerated dead before his son. The aftermath resulted in the man soothing the boy by claiming that his job is to take care of him and that he was “appointed to do that by god.” And even states he would, “kill anyone who touches the boy” (77). He tells the boy that even if they had killed someone it would not be a

Throughout the novel, survival is a constant objective for the boy and his father. McCarthy’s gripping and frightening moments are most obviously interwoven with this theme. Soon after the death of his father the boy looks up and sees that “someone was coming. He started to turn and go back into the woods but he didnt. He just stood in the road and waited, the pistol in his hand” (McCarthy 281). With the approach of this new potential threat, the boy’s safety and survival are brought into question. As the strange man comes near, a tension builds while the boy tries to make a decision that could quite possibly affect the rest of his life. The tension dissipates when it is revealed that the man is not a threat, but a

The love between the protagonists in the times of hardship is the most profound relationship in the book and the strength of it raises the standard of the novel. The relation of the father and the son is very strong and symbolizes protection to the child. They take the initiative to struggle and live in an apocalyptic place which has been completely destroyed. The father is like the soul of his son and the very last hope for the son to survive .The son finds support in his son when he goes through the stages of loneliness and despair. It is a natural way for people to rely on others for support and by survival instincts; it is deeper when there is such a close relationship between a father and a son. McCarthy in terms of characterization makes the buy very innocent as he does not know how to differentiate between the “good guys” and “bad guys”. He wants to help everyone and on the other hand the father is very strong and is wise. He lives each and every day as a normal day so that he can keep his son strong as well. The father is very intelligent as he responds to his son questions thoughtfully to keep his son’s hope up. The father is very optimistic even when they are facing a hard time moving forward. To quote, “The lay listening, Can you do it? When the time comes? When the time comes there will be no time. Now is the time. Curse God and die. What if it doesn’t fire? It has to fire. What if it doesn’t fire? Could you crush that beloved

‘The Crucible’ is an allegory. An allegory is a story with an obvious meaning but if you look deeper into it, there is another meaning. In this case, the obvious meaning is the Salem witch-hunt and the hidden meaning is McCarthyism. McCarthyism started in the early 1950’s and it was governmental accusations with no evidence. Joseph McCarthy started doing trials on those he thought were communist, but he had no evidence for it. This is the same as the witch trials in The Crucible. Arthur Miller wrote this in response to McCarthyism.

​These two worlds Collins and McCarthy created where killing is a form of entertainment and/or necessity for one’s survival, one may assume that expressing any form of humanity is a sign of weakness. Moreover, because the main characters of both novels

The idea of killing someone never would have crossed the children’s minds until the natural instinct to survive replaced the want to do right. The children in sense became barbaric when they let their natural instincts override their domestic upbringing.

Wolf whistle is based on a real life tragedy that occurred in 1955. Lewis Nordan, the author uses humor to alleviate the vicious tone that was given off from the violence and racism. During 1955 Jim Crow laws were in effect, so segregation and inequality was present throughout the whole novel. Jim Crow laws sparked a significant amount of unfair trials, where the guilty people were magically let go, unpunished. The Emmett Till case was one of the many unfair trials. It solely revolved around violence and racism, which still exists in our society today.

Many studies have been conducted to determine the reason otherwise nonviolent people can commit vehement actions against another human: otherwise innocent people have proven to be capable of the most unimaginable of acts after being caught up in their actions. Maxine Kumin’s poem, “Woodchucks,” indirectly addresses this issue by presenting a metaphor of a woodchuck infestation being controlled by a fanatical hunter. The poem can either be interpreted to recount a simple, meaningless woodchuck hunt or to serve as a representation of the manners by which people can be overcome by desires for violence. Though a reader might at first overlook the violent genocidal references throughout the poem, after a thorough analysis

In the 1950’s there was a scare of communism and people were being accused of being communist. From the article “McCarthyism: Witch Hunting and Blacklisting in the 1950s” “McCarthy's claims continued into 1954, this time targeting the Army. For eight weeks, in front of millions of television viewers, McCarthy questioned Army officials, including many war heroes.” Many people were getting questioned about being communist even though there wasn’t any real proof. McCarthy had questioned a lot of people including two people that had been Secretary of State. He had made a list of questionable claims, he didn't have any real proof but the Senate called for a full investigation. In the article “Famous Speeches: Joseph McCarthy's “Enemies from Within”, “This is glaringly true in the State Department, where those who were born with every possible advantage are the ones who have been most traitorous.” He is saying that the people with the most opportunities and that the country has been good too have been traitors. There is no actual evidence to this statement. He is picking out a group of people and using them. Because of his experience in the Red Scare he was able to write “The Crucible”.

The message in which Miller writes teaches teenagers about what life was like in the centuries before their time, and what some of the themes in those times were; which are also parallel to what happened during Miller’s lifetime, in the era of McCarthyism, as it does in today’s social and political problems. All three of these eras have intolerance, hysteria, reputation, and empowerment woven throughout them. This is one of the reasons they are connected to each other.

Joseph McCarthy was a senator who used a series of tactics fueled by manipulation, deceit, and scapegoating to achieve his end goal: to gain fame and popularity. This started an era which came to be known as McCarthyism, named after the man himself. He exploited a fear that many people held after World War II, the Red Scare, and out of it came instant fame. Here, in his speech at Wheeling, he earned millions of followers who would join him in the hopes of defeating Communism once and for all. Unfortunately, like all famous fibbers, McCarthy would eventually make a series of bad decisions that would make him unpopular. Beginning with the See it Now broadcasts and the Army-McCarthy hearings, McCarthy would lose the surge of popularity he

Violence in the short story is very interesting because its so apparent and yet so deep. Towards the end of the story, the Misfit says to Grandmother “She would of been a good woman . . . if it had been somebody there to shoot her every minute of her life.” Flannery O’Connor doesn’t say that being exposed to violence makes them better people, but the message is clear: violence changes us as a people (both in the story and in the real world). Up until the very end, each member of the family, mostly Grandmother, acted egotistically and only focused in herself. None of the characters take a minute to evaluate whats right and wrong for themselves or anyone else. They all react based on their instincts without thinking things through so much. But when Grandmother is put in a life or death situation where she’s forced to carefully pick her words and actions, she is suddenly capable of a being more selfless and spiritually sound. The Grandmother’s everyday considerations probably have nothing to do with her son or the kids, really anyone in her family, but when she is faced with her own mortality she has this moment of “grace”—she calls the Misfit her own son, and reach makes an effort, emotionally and physically, hoping to save herself or comfort him. In the end, however, the Grandmother’s moment of “grace” ends up getting her killed. O’Connor

Violence is defined as a behavior involving physical or mental force intending to hurt, damage, or kill someone. In the words of Zak Ibrahim, peace is defined as the proliferation or the increase in the existence of Justice. But where does love fit in to these conversations? Violence cannot necessarily transform into love, but the presence of it is surely important. Violence involving our most loved ones, helps us find love and compassion in the toughest of situations, and leads us toward paths of peace. In this essay, examples will be drawn from Zak Ibrahim 's keynote presentation, The Road by Cormac McCarthy, Beautiful Boy; a film directed by Shawn Ku, and Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut.

For ages, people have been debating the idea of human morality and whether or not at its core humanity is good or bad. This philosophy is explored in Cormac McCarthy’s novel, The Road. The road is the story of a man and boy living in a post-apocalyptic world. Some cataclysmic event has crippled Earth’s natural ecosystem, leaving the skies engulfed in ash and the ground devoid of much life. The duo aim to journey south as a way to escape being frozen to death in the oncoming winter. During their journey, the boy and man come across different people and places that give them a better understand of what humanity has become and where they stand on that spectrum. Throughout The Road, McCarthy revisits the idea of being the “good guy” when there is no longer a need to, “carrying the fire” as it’s detailed in the book. The dichotomy between the boy’s moral conscience and the man’s selfish ideals helps develop McCarthy’s idea of humanity losing its selflessness in the face of danger.

The intentions of actions help decide whether it is morally good or evil. The man has many more blurred moral situations than the boy throughout the novel. One example of this is when he kills the “roadrat”(35), out of self-defense for his son. The man assures the boy “[they] are still the good guys”(39) even after he killed the man, because his initial intent was not to harm him. McCarthy demonstrates the idea that good gets evil and evil gets evil with the outcome of the “roadrat”. He refuses not to harm the boy and man and therefore gets killed. Although this exact situation is not the basis of the norm morality in modern society, it still helps demonstrate the triumph of good. In a regular world this intention of good can be applied to simple things, such as; a small lie in order to protect others. The novel helps demonstrate principles by using the extremes. In an apocalyptic