No Country for Old Men

MattDP wrote: If that's really the case then I'm a little disappointed with the book. I don't like the fact that his tracking down of a secretive and secure drugs boss is simply glossed over - it made him feel more like a ghost than a man.

It's one of McCarthy's genre, or anti-genre, signals. The focus of a book or movie - what is actually shown - is important in a number of ways, one of which is that the selection of scene, of situation, of character, of everything clues us in to what the story is. The story of NCfOM is not the usual story one might construct from the sum of its parts. It's not an action novel. It's not a crime novel, or a detective novel. It's utterly beside the point of the book how Chigurh does the things he does. That's not where the camera is focused.

This is also one of the ways in which Moss is a stand-in for the reader. Moss's main sin, the one that kills him and everything that he loves, is to think he's in an genre novel. Chigurh gives him the chance to bring in the money and save his wife; Moss thinks for a moment he's a badass, Reacher or Chuck Norris or Parker, and spouts lines that would be at home in any one of a hundred genre novels. He's completely, utterly misjudged the situation - misjudged life - and is destroyed by his lack of understanding. Moss doesn't die 'on screen' because he's lost, because his gun battle is futile (not the climax of a bad action movie) and stupid, because the narrative has other things to say that have nothing to do with Moss. He's wormfood, and the universe does not care.

Re: Judge Holden: I accept that he might be the inherent evil of mankind, not simply America, as M<cCarthy has a thing about the regenerative and horrifying power of violence. But I think that reading is less placed in the story, because the story thrives so on its geographic placement. Blood Meridian is a story about where it is set.

I've never seen anything written about Holden being the Devil that was worth reading.

wolvendancer wrote: It's utterly beside the point of the book how Chigurh does the things he does. That's not where the camera is focused.

Fair point, but I still feel it's a disappointing aspect of the book. One of the things I've always admired about McCarthy's work is that he seemed to be one of the few authors whose work can be counted as genuinely deep & artistic literature who also writes plots that hang together by and of themselves. It means that readers can engage and enjoy his books at a superficial level, but delve deeper if they so choose, an admirable trait in an age of increasing artistic elitism.

NCfOM is the fourth book of his I've read (after The Road, Blood Meridian & Suttree) and this one instance of Chigurh tracking down the drugs boss counts as the first plot point that seems to exist for the sole purpose of advancing the wider moral and philosophical themes of the book rather than also advancing the story. That's a weakness.

wolvendancer wrote: Moss doesn't die 'on screen' because he's lost, because his gun battle is futile (not the climax of a bad action movie) and stupid, because the narrative has other things to say that have nothing to do with Moss. He's wormfood, and the universe does not care.

I did pick a lot of this up from the book, although your commentary remains fascinating. You've clearly thought an awful lot more about it than I have. My criticism is not of Moss' death in the book, but in the film. I did *not* pick up that subtext in the film, and his detail-light off-screen death felt annoying and confusing rather than intriguing.

It's interesting that in the book I never felt there was a "protagonist" as such. While Bell narrates much of the story, the focus seems much more distant, more like the indifferent universe itself. I cannot, of course, tell how much of that comes from knowing how the story ended before I started reading but given that fate is a major theme in the book, it "feels" correct that McCarthy should distance his readers from the characters in that way.

Not so in the film: it felt like Moss was the "protagonist" and so the sudden discovery he wasn't in an offhand manner felt forced and infuriating. I have no idea how much of that is down to the direction, and how much is down to the expectations of an audience as regards how a film plot is "supposed" to unfold.

wolvendancer wrote: I've never seen anything written about Holden being the Devil that was worth reading.

I didn't say otherwise, just that it was popular. It's too obvious. Although given the religious themes underpinning the book, I'd be surprised if some Satanic inference isn't to be drawn from his character.

Also I had no idea you were a writer. What do you write?

I don't think Judge Holden is the Devil as much as mentioned earlier, the "god of war." He is a manifestation of the warlike urge and all the chaos and depravity the warlike state brings. He appears from nothingness as a band of men are chased by another and he is the catalyst that brings that conflict from one of fox chasing rabbit to fox chasing rabbits-with-gunpowder.

I think McCarthy could set BLOOD MERIDIAN anywhere thematically, and he would draw forth a Judge Holden for any conflict zone. Judge Holden is out there amongst the Janjaweed, he is in the Pakistani Tribal Area, he's nestled in with FARC, he's with the cartels. He's everywhere he's called. Anywhere there is Unending War is where he is.

"As devised and refined by James M. Cain, Jim Thompson and their gloomy paperback peers, the crime novel aimed its cheap handgun at the heart of America's most prized beliefs about its destiny: that the loot we've scooped up will belong to us forever and that history allows clean getaways."

"McCarthy's snake-and-scorpion theology offers his characters no second chances, and it hints that their first chances never, in fact, existed. " --Walter Kirn

I think Moss dies off screen because McCarthy is telling us that in a random, uncaring universe our attachments and attempts at building heroic narratives don't matter, and once Moss enters the machine he is ground to sausage with everyone else. The book and the movie are just a kick in the nuts to traditional movies.

The car accident was the other thing that mystified me while watching the movie. Okay, there was a car accident. Who was in it? Some random people? I don't know. It almost felt like they forgot to cut some random footage.

And I was ambivalent about the ending. It seemed ridiculously anti-climactic for such a tense movie, but I am a fan of Tommy Lee Jones and will forgive him for almost anything. Also, I remember kind of agreeing with what he was saying in that scene, though I don't specifically remember what was said now. Maybe I was lulled into just nodding my head because he made it sound reasonable.

MattDP wrote: NCfOM is the fourth book of his I've read (after The Road, Blood Meridian & Suttree)

That's an excellent selection of McCarthy, although I really disliked 'The Road'. I think it's the first moment at which he descends into self-parody, and it is shockingly ignorant of the work formerly done in post-apocalyptic fiction, starting in the Middle Ages. It is overwritten and sentimental, which is not a good combination.

It's interesting that in the book I never felt there was a "protagonist" as such.

If there is, it's Bell, who it's hard not to somewhat consider a Mary Sue for McCarthy himself.

Although given the religious themes underpinning the book, I'd be surprised if some Satanic inference isn't to be drawn from (Judge Holden's) character.

McCarthy's work is religious in the same way that Joyce's is religious; they acknowledge that our cultures are steeped in Christianity and Christian imagery, find their own stories affected by same, and instead of fighting that influence attempt to make it serve artistic ends. So Holden can be satanic without being Satan.

Also I had no idea you were a writer. What do you write?

Anything from relatively mainstream litfic to fantasy/fabulism to science fiction and everything (especially) in between. I also teach writing and fantasy/sciencefiction lit at university. Amusingly enough, my first introduction to McCarthy was talking to my mate China about his amazing prologue in 'Perdido Street Station', which is heavily influenced by McCarthy.

wolvendancer wrote: That's an excellent selection of McCarthy, although I really disliked 'The Road'. I think it's the first moment at which he descends into self-parody, and it is shockingly ignorant of the work formerly done in post-apocalyptic fiction, starting in the Middle Ages. It is overwritten and sentimental, which is not a good combination.

Well The Road was the first one, and I thought it was the bet thing I'd ever read. I still do. Your criticisms may well hold water but I as I said before, I think the very best books balance readability with depth. Blood Meridian is overly and purposefully obscure in places, and Suttree occasionally dull, but The Road strikes the balance perfectly.

Also I had no idea you were a writer. What do you write?

Anything from relatively mainstream litfic to fantasy/fabulism to science fiction and everything (especially) in between. I also teach writing and fantasy/sciencefiction lit at university. Amusingly enough, my first introduction to McCarthy was talking to my mate China about his amazing prologue in 'Perdido Street Station', which is heavily influenced by McCarthy.[/quote]

I've never read Perdido Street Station though it's been on my wishlist for ages. Will have to pick up a copy. And we need links to your books to add to the F:AT Amazon store

China Mieville is great, Perdido and The Scar both. Iron council... he lost it and wasn't worth finishing. As far as I can tell, he was also influenced strongly by the Titus Groan books, no? Have those on my shelf, never read them.

I don't think The Road is overwritten or overly sentimental - there are references to God at points but it isn't overdone. How is it shockingly ignorant of post-apoc writing before?

Thank God it's ignorant of post-apocalyptic writing. Most of that is utter shit. I lend more credence to folks complaining about how its written in zen koans than those claiming it's overwritten. The writing, to me, conveys the drudgery of life for the man and the boy--it's a struggle daily to find shoes, to drink, and to eat (and not be eaten).



Also, the book fucks you up if you are a father of young children.

jeb wrote: Thank God it's ignorant of post-apocalyptic writing. Most of that is utter shit. I lend more credence to folks complaining about how its written in zen koans than those claiming it's overwritten. The writing, to me, conveys the drudgery of life for the man and the boy--it's a struggle daily to find shoes, to drink, and to eat (and not be eaten).

Sturgeon's Law applies to many things. That said, there have been some fine post-apocalyptic stories, and I will personally vouch for these:

Canticle for Leibowitz
The Stand
Lucifer's Hammer
I Am Legend (technically just a novella)
Y the Last Man (a story told over the course of a 60-issue comic book run)

There have likely been other great post-apocalypse stories that we are both overlooking, given that much of the best science-fiction was written decades ago, coinciding with the peak years of the Cold War.

I watched The Road, but I doubt that I will ever read the book, despite my tendency to read an average of one book a week. The movie was so relentlessly bleak and depressing that I kept the remote in hand for half the movie before finally committing myself to watching the whole thing. It was a decent movie that probably accomplished exactly what the director and the author intended, but it just barely qualified as entertainment in my eyes, due to the extreme harshness of the story.

I read The Road first, then All The Pretty Horses, then No Country for Old Men. Out of those three, I liked All the Pretty Horses the best, then No Country, then The Road.

For me, No Country is the fastest moving, most gripping and the most page turning. Most of it is dialogue, good dialogue. The action scenes are clearly and concisely written, but have the impact that violence generally does: Quick and deadly. It doesn't feature much of McCarthy's excellent prose, though.

All The Pretty Horses is just pretty. It's got heart and emotion, love and loss and despair, etc.

The Road has all that despair, and then some. It's also got poetic descriptions of a really gray landscape. Repeated ad nauseam. It's a good book, and it is very heart wrenching, but there was a lot of overly describing gray tress with dead leaves covered in ash for me.

Shellhead wrote:

jeb wrote: Thank God it's ignorant of post-apocalyptic writing. Most of that is utter shit. I lend more credence to folks complaining about how its written in zen koans than those claiming it's overwritten. The writing, to me, conveys the drudgery of life for the man and the boy--it's a struggle daily to find shoes, to drink, and to eat (and not be eaten).

Sturgeon's Law applies to many things. That said, there have been some fine post-apocalyptic stories, and I will personally vouch for these:

Canticle for Leibowitz
The Stand
Lucifer's Hammer
I Am Legend (technically just a novella)
Y the Last Man (a story told over the course of a 60-issue comic book run)

There have likely been other great post-apocalypse stories that we are both overlooking, given that much of the best science-fiction was written decades ago, coinciding with the peak years of the Cold War.

I watched The Road, but I doubt that I will ever read the book, despite my tendency to read an average of one book a week. The movie was so relentlessly bleak and depressing that I kept the remote in hand for half the movie before finally committing myself to watching the whole thing. It was a decent movie that probably accomplished exactly what the director and the author intended, but it just barely qualified as entertainment in my eyes, due to the extreme harshness of the story.

I have read The Stand and A Canticle for Leibowitz -- and they're both very good. I think The Stand is Stephen King's best novel with Salem's Lot a close second.

A Canticle for Leibowitz is a sweeping religious tale spanning a thousand years in which humanity destroys itself not once, but twice with nuclear weapons. I don't think Walter Miller ever wrote anything else. It's an odd but excellent story.

jeb wrote: Also, the book fucks you up if you are a father of young children.

Well, exactly. The entire book is this twee, sentimental, melodramatic take on this nameless father-and-child couple, which we are of course to generalize (like all bad literary fiction) to all father-and-son relationships, everywhere. The situation is ludicrous on just about every level imaginable, and not satisfied with the ludicrous, McCarthy descend into gore camp (human limbs nom nom nom). It is indulgent and small.

Here's a good critical discussion on 'The Road', one of the participants of which is China, which covers a lot of the bases:

crookedtimber.org/2007/01/22/on-the-road/

Buy me a beer sometime and I'll rant further.

Re: post-apocalyptic fiction. I would argue that the genre emerges out of the combination of Christian eschatology and the black plague, which really was, in a way not many people appreciate, The End Times for a lot of people that lived then. In its way, Boccaccio's 'Decameron' is an apocalyptic novel. In any case, 'The Road' might have been a little less cringeworthy if McCarthy had done more reading, but then again, maybe not. I have a feeling the book is mostly about what I mentioned above: getting as teary-eyed and sentimental about fatherhood as one can imagine, then literally constructing a world in which one can get even more teary-eyed and sentimental about it all. We are alone, the world is literally dead, almost every creature still alive is the direst of threats, we starve, we freeze, the only thing real is love between my son and.. ACK I'M KILT.

'The Road' is a novel about the sympathetic fallacy. McCarthy just doesn't realize it.

I think I'll stick to china's fiction.

mikecl wrote: A Canticle for Leibowitz is a sweeping religious tale spanning a thousand years in which humanity destroys itself not once, but twice with nuclear weapons. I don't think Walter Miller ever wrote anything else. It's an odd but excellent story.

I've been an atheist for most of my life, but A Canticle for Leibowitz scored direct hits on that part of my brain where religious thoughts come from. Damn near made me a believer.