July / USA Reading: The Road by Cormac McCarthy

[motherhubbard]

I really enjoy the dialogue. It felt very natural to me.

[Nossa]

I have to admit I had no problem with the language and style and diction. Now I also want to say that this is very American english, and not just American but American from I think the south west part of the US. Are the people who had some trouble with the language and style have english as not their primary language or are British english and not used to the Americanism? That could be part of the problem. Not only did I not have a problem with the language, but I actually found it easy and natural.

I didn't have a problem with the language, just the style and dialogues. I thought the language was easy, and as I said before McCarthy has a unique way with words and diction.

[bouquin]

You're partially correct. But this is just a part of the story's setting, the 'end of the world' atmosphere that took over from the start can't change, and so he's forced to keep almost the same description throughout the entire novel. I think what's really interesting is that nothing really happens. Meaning that, for most of the first 70 pages or so, nothing happened except for the people they met and the man the father killed. Other than that, it's just them, walking in the snow and seeking refuge. What's interesting, as I was saying, is that I always felt compelled to come back and finish it. I mean, I did get bored after a while, but even when I put down the book for a while, I felt that I always wanted to know how it's gonna end and what will happen. I'm not done with the book yet, I'm a very slow reader, but I'm looking forward to finishing it.

I have a comment on the idea of punctuation in the novel. I've had a hard time reading the story at first cuz of the lack of commas in particular. It sounds funny, I know, but I had to re-read many parts cuz they simply didn't make sense to my little brain from a first read. I think that even in poetry we use punctuation. I know I do (not that I'm that good, but that's how I see it). I think the style was a bit difficult, but McCarthy made it up with his brilliant choice of words, metaphors and overall description.

It's true, nothing much happens to Papa and Boy especially in the early part. They spend their time rummaging through abandoned filling stations, seeking shelter under bridges, and trying to build a fire. Once in a while these activities are punctuated by succinct conversations. Same as you, this apparent monotony and sameness did not prevent me from being curious about what was going to transpire next. Unlike you though, I have finished reading the book.

I had no problem with the punctuations. Commas and semi-colons are not my strong suit, anyway.

[Virgil]

There are a couple of passages I wanted to discuss before we closed this out. Here's one for now. Please excuse any typos.

He [the father] watched him [the boy] come through the grass and kneel with the cup of water he'd fetched. There was light all about him. He took the cup and drank and lay back. They had for food a single tin of peaches but he made the boy eat it and he would not take any. I cant, he said. It's all right.
I'll save you half.
Okay. You save it until tomorrow.
He took the cup and moved away and when he moved the light moved with him. He'd wanted to try and make a tent out of the tarp but the man would not let him. He said that he didn't want anything covering him. He lay watching the boy at the fire. He wanted to be able to see. Look around you, he said. There is no prophet in the earth's long chronicle who's not honored here today. Whatever form you spoke of you were right.(page 277 in my Vintage edition)

I think we see here for sure that the boy is regarded as some religious manifestation. Whether that's McCarthy's view or just the father's inside the novel could be in dispute, but the nonetheless the boy carries religious revelation to either the father or in the novel as a whole. We see it in the kneeling, the cup (alluding to a chalice), the light, even a sort of Christian ritual of communion. Even the grass seems to echoe Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass, which purports a religious charge to nature. But the last three sentences there are eye openers. " Look around you, he said." Who is he talking to there? Himself actually. This is actually a soliloquy. He's asking himself to look around. Then: "There is no prophet in the earth's long chronicle who's not honored here today." Ok, the boy is a stand in for all of history's prophets, and the equivilant. I'm with him there still. One could consider it sacrilidge but given that the earth has been nearly wiped out of people I can see the point. But here then is where I'm confused: "Whatever form you spoke of you were right." What is he refering to? What particularly of the boy talk was he right about? And "form" is a very strange and charged word. I have some thoughts, but let me see what others think. Any thoughts?

[motherhubbard]

But here then is where I'm confused: "Whatever form you spoke of you were right." What is he refering to? What particularly of the boy talk was he right about? And "form" is a very strange and charged word. I have some thoughts, but let me see what others think. Any thoughts?

I think his existence and purpose had become so basic and singular of focus. His reason for living is the boy. His only delight or hope is the boy. As long as such goodness remains on earth hope remains. I think that when he looks at the boy he sees the incarnation of everything good in mankind. I think form is every form of religion. He sees the boy and he knows there is a God. It might be hard to look at anything else in the world and know.

[bouquin]

I have to admit I had no problem with the language and style and diction. Now I also want to say that this is very American english, and not just American but American from I think the south west part of the US. Are the people who had some trouble with the language and style have english as not their primary language or are British english and not used to the Americanism? That could be part of the problem. Not only did I not have a problem with the language, but I actually found it easy and natural.

I myself did not have any trouble although English is not my first language. I was just a little surprised in the beginning at the omission of the apostrophe for the contracted verb in the negative. I agree with the opinion expressed earlier that getting rid of the punctuation marks and the like may be in keeping with the bleak atmosphere that pervades the story and the minimalist approach to its narration. Anyway, we are now in the era of text messaging so we should have no problem figuring out the sense of a sentence even if it's been wiped clean of all commas and apostrophes!

[Jozanny]

2/ Luck
When I read the book, I made a comment to myself that it was a bit too convenient how every time they ran out of food they would find something to eat (the bunker, the abandoned house, the ship...).
Well the interesting thing here is that throughout the interview, they discuss the fact that MC has had some really bad financial times

lug, I wanted to come back to this from the interview one last time: McCarthy's personal circumstances in no way obviates that the bunker and the good house and the ship were a little too convenient, because they were.

This title was my first exposure to McCarthy outside of knowing more than I need to about adapting his material for film, and I remain ambivalent about the book on the whole. Is the boy a new Christ? If so he has some inept moments, letting the valves leak, forgetting the gun, even giving Ely food could be seen as questionable.

It seems to me, in some ways, that this was McCarthy yanking our chains on the cheap: This is a world which died out in sterility awfully fast, with no real cues as to why. Bombs, mega volcanoes? With the cannibals rather briefly referenced. They have a truck, they have captives, and in one additional instance, they pass the father and son with a fleeting vision of what their society might turn into. But if the good guy in the yellow gray parka doesn't eat people, then the planet must having living patches still round and about.

As I wrote once before, if The Road is Cormac's allegory toward his version of salvation, his rationale just isn't good enough. I've read more challenging versions in science fiction which did not need the Christian symbolism crutch, and Lessing's tale, though older, at least challenges contemporary norms.

[Virgil]

I've read more challenging versions in science fiction which did not need the Christian symbolism crutch, and Lessing's tale, though older, at least challenges contemporary norms.

I think you bring up ligitimate points, but on the one I leave quoted I find curious. If McCarthy is a Christian (I don't know one way or the other) and he wishes to see the world in a Christian framework, why is it a crutch? Are you saying that the works of Graham Greene, Evylin Waugh, TS Eliot, Chesterton, CS Lewis, Shirley Jackson, and others not valid or relying on a crutch? Even William Faulkner uses Christian imagery and symblism to develop his themes.

[Jozanny]

I think you bring up ligitimate points, but on the one I leave quoted I find curious. If McCarthy is a Christian (I don't know one way or the other) and he wishes to see the world in a Christian framework, why is it a crutch? Are you saying that the works of Graham Greene, Evylin Waugh, TS Eliot, Chesterton, CS Lewis, Shirley Jackson, and others not valid or relying on a crutch? Even William Faulkner uses Christian imagery and symblism to develop his themes.

For the purpose of reading the book itself it is a crutch badly used, in my estimation. The ambiguity is more about McCarthy not playing with a full deck, it seems to me. Waugh respects Catholicism even if he will take his digs on what it does to a woman like Julia. As a reader I have a framework.

McCarthy seems to say "screw scaffolding, this way no one can pick on me."

Daddy seems reasonably educated, yet he recalls bits and pieces of the pre-apocalyptic past without having the slightest idea of what created his current apocalyptic evironment--all we know is the power went out. And that the boy is his warrant, then to Ely, possibly god. I mean, come on already.

McCarthy isn't even challenging himself by offering the possibility that hope can take a different, maybe more interesting form.

Yes, I still think it is a good book, but I think his tropes come on the cheap, because he is McCarthy and maybe he didn't want to push himself a little harder. Been known to happen.

[Virgil]

I agree the tropes are simple, but then everything is simple. It's as if McCarthy reduced everything to bare essence. It is not a sophisticated novel, but it wasn't intended to be. Neither is Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea, which stylistically this inherents something.

Daddy seems reasonably educated, yet he recalls bits and pieces of the pre-apocalyptic past without having the slightest idea of what created his current apocalyptic evironment--all we know is the power went out. And that the boy is his warrant, then to Ely, possibly god. I mean, come on already.

First I didn't see anywhere that he didn't recall the cause. Perhaps I missed that memory lapse, I don't know. I believe McCarthy purposely keeps it from us. And quite right. If the intent is to reduce everything to bare essence, then whatever may have caused the apocalypse would have thematic implications that McCarthy doesn't want to tinge the story with.

[Jozanny]

Perhaps I should have written "without offering, in his own mind, a sense of what happened"; because he doesn't; daddy does cue the reader in on some flashbacks, like the scavengers after the markets ran out of food, and cues us in on how the boy was born, but we simply have to accept the extent of the catastrophe as a given. Okay, but even within the text, it is somewhat inconsistent.

Sorry if I read more hyper than usual. I am more hyper than usual, and I am not getting anything done, and I am tired of my world. Tired of this city, pushing back against my landlord, my former employer whom I hate with visceral clench of my stomach, but they are the center for independent living and hey, me them and 20 years nearly of hope and betrayal. I should write the novel; if I did the disability activists would hate me and I don't know that nice folk like MotherHubbard would read it and I can't write the novel now. I have too much on my plate.

I'm going to be 46 years old and I'd like to curse vehemently even in public and I know I can't . I should have asked JBI if I could have latched onto his Italy trip, right?

[bouquin]

Between the 2 principal characters (Papa and Boy) which one did you prefer?

[Jozanny]

Between the 2 principal characters (Papa and Boy) which one did you prefer?

I liked both, but admired the father's tenacity more I guess, at the end of the day.

[Virgil]

Sorry if I read more hyper than usual. I am more hyper than usual, and I am not getting anything done, and I am tired of my world. Tired of this city, pushing back against my landlord, my former employer whom I hate with visceral clench of my stomach, but they are the center for independent living and hey, me them and 20 years nearly of hope and betrayal. I should write the novel; if I did the disability activists would hate me and I don't know that nice folk like MotherHubbard would read it and I can't write the novel now. I have too much on my plate.

I'm going to be 46 years old and I'd like to curse vehemently even in public and I know I can't . I should have asked JBI if I could have latched onto his Italy trip, right?

That's all right Jozy. I wasn't criticizing. I was just trying to understand and discuss. This novel isn't for everyone. I'm not claiming it's as good as The Sound and the Fury. What city do you live in? I'm 46 myself and one always has that time's winged chariot creeping behind.

Between the 2 principal characters (Papa and Boy) which one did you prefer?

Not sure what you mean by prefer. The novel requires both. If you mean who did I identify with, I would have to say the father.

[bouquin]

I agree that the novel requires both Papa and Boy, otherwise it would not be the same story. Which character did you like better ... or dislike? and why? ("Identify with" is good, too).