Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy

[Indian Boy]

I just finished reading Cormac McCarthy's 'Blood Meridian' and I'm a bit dissapointed. Unfortunately it took me about three grueling weeks to get through this book, which is long for me. Lately I've been in a Cormac McCarthy phase having recently read, Outer Darkness, The Road, Child of God, and No Country for Old Men, and I really enjoyed all of these books.

But the reason it took me so long to finish Blood Meridian is because the book lacks plot. Did anybody else read this book and realize this? Rather then having a central story line or plot that drives the story and pulls the reader, this book was more of a general novel about the widespread massive slaughtering that occurred during the mid-19th century along the Texas/Mexican border.

I've heard many people praise this book, arguing that it is CM's best work, but I strongly disagree. I found it to be repetitive, slightly boring at times, and extremely difficult to follow. I mean some of the characters have several different names (first names, last names, nicknames, titles). Half the time I thought it was a new character being introduced, then several pages later I realize that it's a character by a different name that's been in the story the whole time.

I don't know what else to say....... Anybody have any comments?

[Modest Proposal]

I hate to be dissenting in the first post but I am one of those who does think it is his best. In fact, I think it may be the most well written American novel since Moby-Dick.

It wasn't really a plot driven work in my opinion, that is why so little is known about the main character. In my mind it is about atmosphere and conveying the horror of the epoch. The first scene of Native Americans attacking is about as powerful as I have ever read. I think the complex characterization of evil in the Judge is also fascinating. Sort of Conrad's 'Fascination with abomination'.

The merits though really lie in the lyricism. The words are put together in beautiful ways.

[Vautrin]

Indian Boy:

I agree with a number of the points you made, especially the one about multiple names being given to certain characters, which causes some initial confusion. The reason I feel people praise it so much has more to do with the feelings and emotions it evokes than its actual entertainment value. Also, the way it was written is an achievement in itself. Cormac clearly did his research when it came to accurately describing the villages, architecture, vegetation, weaponry, clothing, etc., of that particular setting in that particular period in history. His use of prose was also remarkable, even if being quite dense at times. Blood Meridian is almost a three-way marriage, if you will, between an epic poem, a novel, and a history book.

The slow pace of the novel was intentional in that it reflected the reality of the time. Also, Westerns, novels and movies, tend to be very fast paced and full of non-stop action. McCarthy clearly did not want to do that, especially for a group of mercenaries covering untold distances on horseback, or by foot in some cases. I also noticed how some of the action scenes were somewhat ambiguous in their description. Again, this was most likely CM's attempt at realistic storytelling.

What made the book for me was Judge Holden. This character has that X factor that really captures the reader's attention. You love to hate him, but are in constant awe of his words and behavior. I can't wait to see how they portray him and this novel on the big screen. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0983189/

Hope they don't include the "baby-tree." :sick:

[mal4mac]

Plot? Who needs plot? If you want nothing but plot, and an easy read, try dime store cowboy pulp. Atmosphere, horror, beautiful language, strangeness, density, complex and intriguing characters ... who needs plot when you have all that?

[calebjross]

I'll join you in this, Indian Boy. I'm definitely a McCarthy fan, but Blood Meridian just didn't do it for me. I don't think, for me, it had anything to do with the lack of plot (I read much more character driven fiction vs. plot driven fiction). For me, I think because it was a fairly difficult novel to follow, I didn't fall in love with it like I wanted to. I say "difficult," in the sense that McCarthy's style (lack of dialog tags, unwillingness to establish a setting, disregarding character names) seems to be at his most obnoxious with this book. And again, I am a McCarthy fan, so I would never refer to his style as obnoxious generally. Blood Meridian was as close to obnoxious as he gets (of what I've read of his).

[stlukesguild]

I'm sorry, but I'll need to be another voice of dissension. Blood Meridian is in my opinion unquestionably McCarthy's greatest book and one of the strongest novels (American or otherwise) of the second half of the 20th century. On the issue of accessibility or the "difficulty" of the book I might question whether this is due to any failing on the part of the author rather than on the part of the reader. I don't see McCarthy as employing anything near an excess of experimental formal elements. I would think any reader somewhat familiar with some 20th century literature such as William Faulkner and perhaps even a bit of poetry would have no problem with this novel.

The criticism as to a lack of plot seems absurd. The plot is simple enough: something of a twisted bildungsroman in which the hero is actually something of an anti-hero. His transformation may suggest certain elements of maturity... at least a repugnance to the evil that is Judge Holden... but perhaps more of a humiliation... ending in his final horrific humiliation... and suggested killing... once he has stood his ground openly rejected the Judge ("You ain't nuthin' "). The plot is perhaps nothing spectacular... certainly not some action-packed Western... but the novel works more as an accumulation of scenes.

The strength of the book is to be found especially in its poetic and symbolic elements. There is the contrast of extreme violence and the embrace of the warrior culture with the almost visionary passages describing the landscape of the American west. To this there is the further added element of the Biblical allusions... perhaps most obviously in the form of the Satanic Judge Holden, almost certainly one of the most powerful and consistently memorable... and consistently evil characters in the whole of literature. Judge Holden's brilliance... his almost inhuman form... his obsession with understanding the whole of the natural world... his open antagonism to God... Nature... and his absolute sadistic embrace of violence and all that might be construed as evil establish him as a figure with clear allusions to Satan himself. The novel seems to clearly touch upon uniquely American obsessions with religion, violence, and nature in a manner that certainly owes much to Melville, Hawthorne, and especially Faulkner... but is far more horrific and bleak than even a novel such as As I Lay Dying. In this... and many other ways it clearly echoes Melville's Moby Dick... and like Moby Dick makes extensive use of an almost disorienting contrast of styles... in the case of Blood Meridian these are between the visionary splendor and allusions to Biblical and even Shakespearean tragedies through the use of a clearly archaic language...and the mundane relating of the horrific.

[calebjross]

On the issue of accessibility or the "difficulty" of the book I might question whether this is due to any failing on the part of the author rather than on the part of the reader. I don't see McCarthy as employing anything near an excess of experimental formal elements.
The difficultly I mention has nothing to do with experimentation. I'm not sure where you got that assumption. My comment was:

I say "difficult," in the sense that McCarthy's style (lack of dialog tags, unwillingness to establish a setting, disregarding character names) seems to be at his most obnoxious with this book. And again, I am a McCarthy fan, so I would never refer to his style as obnoxious generally. Blood Meridian was as close to obnoxious as he gets (of what I've read of his).

[Indian Boy]

Well everybody is entitled to their opinion. For all of you with dissenting opinions I respect the points you made, especially about Blood Meridian being a literary tool used to convey the horrors of the time in beautiful ways.

If I may ask, what did you all think of the ending? A bit ambiguous. We know that the boy/the man enters the outhouse and that the Judge is waiting inside naked. We also know that the Judge embraces the boy/man and that later, when two men open the outhouse door, they are completely shocked by what they see. And finally we know that the Judge is on stage at the very ending dancing naked.

I have read two different interpretations of the ending. The first, and more common, is that the Judge murdered the boy/man in a horrific way, maybe decapitation, and left him mutilated in such a way that it would shock the senses of the two men who open the outhouse door.

The other interpretation I've read is that the Judge sodomized the boy/man and left him raped in the outhouse, possibly bleeding from his raped behind, and that is the reason the two men are shocked by what they see. This interpretation is backed up by earlier events in the novel where the Judge rapes and kills children, the fact that the Judge is always trying to touch the boy/man, and that the Judge is naked in the outhouse.

Anybody agree with the second interpretation? I think I tend to lean towards the first myself.

[stlukesguild]

The difficultly I mention has nothing to do with experimentation. I'm not sure where you got that assumption. My comment was:

I say "difficult," in the sense that McCarthy's style (lack of dialog tags, unwillingness to establish a setting, disregarding character names) seems to be at his most obnoxious with this book. And again, I am a McCarthy fan, so I would never refer to his style as obnoxious generally. Blood Meridian was as close to obnoxious as he gets (of what I've read of his).

These formal elements... the lack of quotes/dialog tags, disregard of character names are indeed owed to Modernist experimentation with the traditional forms of the novel. They are quite common to Joyce, Faulkner, Jose Saramago, Thomas Pynchon, and others. I don't find them overly challenging after some experience with other examples of the Modern novel. As for setting... I can't imagine too much more of a brilliant delineation of "setting" than that to be found in the almost visionary passages which establish the landscape of the American west... in such a contrast to the horrific descriptiveness of the various killings.

[stlukesguild]

If I may ask, what did you all think of the ending? A bit ambiguous. We know that the boy/the man enters the outhouse and that the Judge is waiting inside naked. We also know that the Judge embraces the boy/man and that later, when two men open the outhouse door, they are completely shocked by what they see. And finally we know that the Judge is on stage at the very ending dancing naked.

I have read two different interpretations of the ending. The first, and more common, is that the Judge murdered the boy/man in a horrific way, maybe decapitation, and left him mutilated in such a way that it would shock the senses of the two men who open the outhouse door.

The other interpretation I've read is that the Judge sodomized the boy/man and left him raped in the outhouse, possibly bleeding from his raped behind, and that is the reason the two men are shocked by what they see. This interpretation is backed up by earlier events in the novel where the Judge rapes and kills children, the fact that the Judge is always trying to touch the boy/man, and that the Judge is naked in the outhouse.

Anybody agree with the second interpretation? I think I tend to lean towards the first myself.

I lean toward the second interpretation (although the point would seem to be that we cannot know). The critic Patrick W. Shaw who has written on violence in the American novel argues quite persuasively (I think) that:

In the virile warrior culture which dominates Blood Meridian... seduction into public homoeroticism is a dreadful fate. We do not see behind the outhouse door to know the details of the kid's corruption. It may be as simple as the embrace that we do witness or as violent as the sodomy implied by the judge's killing of the Indian children. The kid's powerful survival instinct perhaps suggests that he is a more willing participant than a victim. However, the degree of debasement and the extent of the kid's willingness are incidental. The public revelation of the act is what matters. Other men have observed the kid's humiliation… In such a male culture, public homoeroticism is untenable and it is this sudden revelation that horrifies the observers at Fort Griffin. No other act could offend their masculine sensibilities as the shock they display… This triumph over the kid is what the exhibitionist and homoerotic judge celebrates by dancing naked atop the wall, just as he did after assaulting the half-breed boy.

The closing two arguments seem to be the strongest to me. Mere decapitation would not seem to be enough to shock the sort of men of which we are speaking. The outhouse scene follows the kid/man's final rejection of the Judge ("You ain't nuthin' ") and it suggests something almost Biblical... a public rejection of Satan... and I somewhat suspect that merely killing the kid/man would not have been enough for Holden/Satan. He would need to humiliate him. And then he returns dance naked and play the fiddle (again, a Satanic image).

[Vautrin]

...I think the complex characterization of evil in the Judge is also fascinating. Sort of Conrad's 'Fascination with abomination'.

I definitely see a connection between Blood Meridian and Heart of Darkness. They both deal with the horrors of colonialism and the destruction of indigenous peoples for monetary gain. They both involve groups of armed men traveling far distances to carry out dirty work for larger business/national interests.

Kurtz and Judge are two very similar characters. Both are towering geniuses who seem to have figured out how to tap into the dark side. They're both great leaders and manipulators of men. They could make anyone believe whatever they tell them and even have them turn a blind eye to the atrocities they committed. Above all, they both instill as much fear as they do a sense of wonder, so that for the other characters it is hard to form a definite opinion about them, which allows them to continue to carry out their plans uncontested.

The Kid is the equivalent of Marlow, and both come to accept and embrace their "mentors", Marlow figuratively and the Kid literally.(the naked embrace) The reason he is naked when he hugs the kid is to demonstrate the kid's own complete acceptance of the real Judge, of pure, unmasked evil. What the men later saw in the jakes wasn't something literal. Their reaction was a commentary on man's tendency to succumb to temptation and take the evil road. The Epilogue, in its imagery, demonstrates this vicious cycle of violence and moral depravity.

[stlukesguild]

I definitely see a connection between Blood Meridian and Heart of Darkness. They both deal with the horrors of colonialism and the destruction of indigenous peoples for monetary gain. They both involve groups of armed men traveling far distances to carry out dirty work for larger business/national interests.

Kurtz and Judge are two very similar characters.

The suggested relationship between these two novels is indeed intriguing. Harold Bloom and many others have pointed out the links to Faulkner and to Melville's Moby Dick. Bloom has suggested that Holden is at once Ahab and the great white whale (the inhuman, hulking albino incarnation of nature and the bestial). Building upon the connection with Kurtz one wonders about a possible link with the more recent incarnation of Kurtz... the towering, hairless Marlon Brando from Apocalypse Now!

The Kid is the equivalent of Marlow, and both come to accept and embrace their "mentors", Marlow figuratively and the Kid literally.(the naked embrace) The reason he is naked when he hugs the kid is to demonstrate the kid's own complete acceptance of the real Judge, of pure, unmasked evil. What the men later saw in the jakes wasn't something literal. Their reaction was a commentary on man's tendency to succumb to temptation and take the evil road. The Epilogue, in its imagery, demonstrates this vicious cycle of violence and moral depravity.

An intriguing interpretation... and certainly a possibility... although I am not convinced that it is the sole interpretation. Of course the ambiguity leaves the book open to multiple possibilities.

[Vautrin]

I definitely see a connection between Blood Meridian and Heart of Darkness. They both deal with the horrors of colonialism and the destruction of indigenous peoples for monetary gain. They both involve groups of armed men traveling far distances to carry out dirty work for larger business/national interests.

Kurtz and Judge are two very similar characters.

The suggested relationship between these two novels is indeed intriguing. Harold Bloom and many others have pointed out the links to Faulkner and to Melville's Moby Dick. Bloom has suggested that Holden is at once Ahab and the great white whale (the inhuman, hulking albino incarnation of nature and the bestial). Building upon the connection with Kurtz one wonders about a possible link with the more recent incarnation of Kurtz... the towering, hairless Marlon Brando from Apocalypse Now!

The Kid is the equivalent of Marlow, and both come to accept and embrace their "mentors", Marlow figuratively and the Kid literally.(the naked embrace) The reason he is naked when he hugs the kid is to demonstrate the kid's own complete acceptance of the real Judge, of pure, unmasked evil. What the men later saw in the jakes wasn't something literal. Their reaction was a commentary on man's tendency to succumb to temptation and take the evil road. The Epilogue, in its imagery, demonstrates this vicious cycle of violence and moral depravity.

An intriguing interpretation... and certainly a possibility... although I am not convinced that it is the sole interpretation. Of course the ambiguity leaves the book open to multiple possibilities.

____________________________________________

The book is certainly open to multiple interpretations, each terrifying in their own unique ways. The reason I concluded what I stated above is that in many of McCarthy's novels one of his most common themes is that of the never ending cycle of violence or despair. For instance, in No Country for Old Men, Sheriff Ed Tom Bell concludes that law enforcement and all those who dedicate their lives to stopping crime and violence, like his father, will never see the day when crime is stopped for good. Violence is a big and seemingly permanent part of who we are and can never truly be eradicated in the complete sense, making his life work, upon reflection, seem almost fruitless.

In this sense Judge is the embodiment of humanity's unshakable predisposition for violence and evil, if taken to the extreme.

You bring up an interesting point about Brando. I totally see it. Perhaps Cormac was inspired by the film just as much as the book.

[sixsmith]

I basically agree with St Lukes here so I won't get into the merits of the book. However, as i've said ad nauseam, I consider 'Suttree' to be McCarthy's true masterpiece. BM for all its unquestionable power and lyrical beauty has always struck me a self conscious work: the evocation of Melville and Faulkner perhaps a little too overt. That may be more attributable to my inability to escape the influence of those writers (particularly Melville, who it seems to me blankets the American landscape: any conscious nod to him is going to magnified greatly).

Suttree, on the other hand, while Faulknerian in parts, has a more unique intensity for mine: McCarthy's beautifully baroque and unflinching prose sounding out the demons of an individual existing in a physical and psychological hinterland. One of my favourite novels.

[Brad Coelho]

I definitely see a connection between Blood Meridian and Heart of Darkness. They both deal with the horrors of colonialism and the destruction of indigenous peoples for monetary gain. They both involve groups of armed men traveling far distances to carry out dirty work for larger business/national interests.

Kurtz and Judge are two very similar characters. Both are towering geniuses who seem to have figured out how to tap into the dark side. They're both great leaders and manipulators of men. They could make anyone believe whatever they tell them and even have them turn a blind eye to the atrocities they committed. Above all, they both instill as much fear as they do a sense of wonder, so that for the other characters it is hard to form a definite opinion about them, which allows them to continue to carry out their plans uncontested.

The Kid is the equivalent of Marlow, and both come to accept and embrace their "mentors", Marlow figuratively and the Kid literally.(the naked embrace) The reason he is naked when he hugs the kid is to demonstrate the kid's own complete acceptance of the real Judge, of pure, unmasked evil. What the men later saw in the jakes wasn't something literal. Their reaction was a commentary on man's tendency to succumb to temptation and take the evil road. The Epilogue, in its imagery, demonstrates this vicious cycle of violence and moral depravity.

I not only saw the parallel w/ Heart of Darkness, but Apocalypse Now's revamped shaping of Kurtz into Brando's character. The bald head (which was partly inspired by Chamberlain's 'My Confession', as Holden had a 'hairless face', which referenced his lack of a beard), the final scene which juxtaposed a ritualistic slaughter of a bull w/ the slaughter of Kurtz seemed to cloak the final scene of Blood Meridian when taking into account the shooting of the bear set amidst a relentless clamor of dancing (much like the percussion that drove the savages about the fire as the bull was slaughtered in Apocalypse Now) & the Judge's embrace in the outhouse...I think a glimmer of Kurtz can be found in most forms of literary evil, as his petulant omnipotence formed such a resonant, modern archetype.

The other aforementioned sources of influence in Paradise Lost (particularly the scene where Glanton's gang encounters the Judge alone in the desert & he rescues them w/ his earthly fabrication of gunpowder), the scope of Moby Dick, the Biblical & Gnostic elements, etc. all ring true at different moments in the novel, some more pervasively than others. McCarthy's quote 'the ugly fact is that books are made out of books. The novel depends on its life on the novels that have been written,' certainly rings true w/ Blood Meridian.

[dslc]

This story features certain phrases which I don't understand.

For example, when they (the scalphunters) are invited by the governor Angel Trias to a banquet, Glaton warns that he and his company do not "keep separate mess".
What on earth does this mean?

Here's the context:

When the lieutenant invited Glanton and his officers to dine Glanton replied that he and his men did not keep separate mess.

I have a lot of questions about this novel. Should I start a separate thread?

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

First, to answer dslc, when Glanton says they don't "keep separate mess," he's just saying the "officers" in his gang don't eat separately from the gang. They stick together.

Well everybody is entitled to their opinion. For all of you with dissenting opinions I respect the points you made, especially about Blood Meridian being a literary tool used to convey the horrors of the time in beautiful ways.

If I may ask, what did you all think of the ending? A bit ambiguous. We know that the boy/the man enters the outhouse and that the Judge is waiting inside naked. We also know that the Judge embraces the boy/man and that later, when two men open the outhouse door, they are completely shocked by what they see. And finally we know that the Judge is on stage at the very ending dancing naked.

I have read two different interpretations of the ending. The first, and more common, is that the Judge murdered the boy/man in a horrific way, maybe decapitation, and left him mutilated in such a way that it would shock the senses of the two men who open the outhouse door.

The other interpretation I've read is that the Judge sodomized the boy/man and left him raped in the outhouse, possibly bleeding from his raped behind, and that is the reason the two men are shocked by what they see. This interpretation is backed up by earlier events in the novel where the Judge rapes and kills children, the fact that the Judge is always trying to touch the boy/man, and that the Judge is naked in the outhouse.

Anybody agree with the second interpretation? I think I tend to lean towards the first myself.
I think these interpretations go against the very point of why McCarthy doesn't tell is what happened. Throughout the whole book, no depiction of violence goes undescribed, and just about the most brutal things imaginable are indeed elucidated. When we don't get that description of what The Judge did to The Kid, we know it is horrible beyond imagination. Decapitation is nothing out of the norm in Blood Meridian, and bleeding after rape would not be considered so, either. What the Judge did was indescribable, so to try and describe it is counter-productive.

[WyattGwyon]

I basically agree with St Lukes here so I won't get into the merits of the book. However, as i've said ad nauseam, I consider 'Suttree' to be McCarthy's true masterpiece. BM for all its unquestionable power and lyrical beauty has always struck me a self conscious work: the evocation of Melville and Faulkner perhaps a little too overt. That may be more attributable to my inability to escape the influence of those writers (particularly Melville, who it seems to me blankets the American landscape: any conscious nod to him is going to magnified greatly).

Suttree, on the other hand, while Faulknerian in parts, has a more unique intensity for mine: McCarthy's beautifully baroque and unflinching prose sounding out the demons of an individual existing in a physical and psychological hinterland. One of my favourite novels.

I also think Suttree is his best work. I will have to reread Blood Meridian now, however, for a couple of reasons. First, because so many I respect have praised it so highly. Also, I concluded that the Judge is an allegorical figure and not a character in any normal sense, an opinion not many seem to entertain. I thought the allegory tiresome, which is one of the reasons BM isn't my favorite McCarthy. Anyway, I will reevaluate my thinking on the Judge this time through.

[dslc]

@Mutatis: Thank you - that makes perfect sense.