A little plot background might help here: the Man has just saved The Boy from a very scary-looking dude who probably would have killed him. (It's unclear why this scary-looking dude tries to kidnap The Boy. To get The Man's stuff? So he can get The Man and The Boy back to his truck and eat them?) It is clear, however, that The Man takes parenting – which, in this book, involves protecting kids from bloodcults – very seriously. Seriously enough, in fact, to say it's his God-given mission in life.

Although McCarthy draws a pretty fierce line between the "good guys" and the "bad guys" in the novel, here's an instance where it seems like The Man wanders into "bad guys" category. Why does The Man call the marauder "My brother at last"? This is the marauder who would have eaten The Boy if given a half a chance. Perhaps it's because The Man had to resort to killing him. Self-defense doesn't make The Man as evil as the marauder, but maybe it puts him in the same ballpark.

This exchange happens pretty soon after The Man had to kill the roadrat. The Boy wants to know if they're still "good guys" after killing someone. Despite his doubts earlier that morning, The Man thinks they are still "good guys." We agree. But we also think McCarthy plays around with his terms here. There are actually no "good guys" in the strictest, most traditional sense. There are just the "sometimes-morally-compromised-but-mostly-good guys."