Not Another Book Club: The Road

[sabotabby]

(Because better late than never, and I'm clearly spamming your friends list anyway today.)

This month's read was The Road by Cormac McCarthy.

I don't know if "enjoyed" is the right word for this sort of thing. It basically hit a lot of my literary kinks. Post-apocalyptic, check. Grimdark, check. Setting-as-character, check. Stylistic quirks, check.

Talking points, along with spoilers, under the cut.



• The major flaw in post-apocalyptic writing in general is turning it into an escapist fantasy of sorts (I am also guilty of doing this, by the way); the world and the characters suffer a great deal, but in the end the slate has been wiped clean and a better civilization can rise from its ashes. (Even after a Class 4!) McCarthy's portrayal is much more realistic—there is no society, and in the wake of the massive environmental and social devastation he describes, there can probably never be one again. There can only be the determination of the survivors to act ethically, and because there's no future, it becomes collective tragedy rather than individual heroism.

EDIT: I think mendaciloquent makes a compelling counter-argument here. Go read that too.

• Other genre tropes: No names (see also: Blindness); no reason given for the disaster (see also: at least half of every post-apocalyptic sci-fi novel ever written). Is this cliché or literary subversion?

• I guess that the most interesting discussion, for those of you who got all the way through it: What did you think of the ending? I felt that it was a cheat, but also that following through on the novel's grim realism would have made the entire story pointless.

I'm sure that there's more I wanted to mention—at any rate, discuss!

Comments

[rbowspryte.livejournal.com]

It was dark. There was a lot of walking. It felt to me like their walking was aimless and at times I lost track of "what where they walking to again?...Oh YEAH!"

It was not boring. I think it was fairly good but it felt a little hopeless and pointless. I'm WAY too optimistic for this book.

I did feel reading it was a weight psychologically.

[mercenarytoast.livejournal.com]

I got less than a third of the way through before I had to put it down. McCarthy's writing style bugs the fuck out of me.

[rohmie.livejournal.com]

Your icon reminded me of this:

[rohmie.livejournal.com]

You have mail.

[lokilokust.livejournal.com]

it's not my favourite mccarthy, but i really appreciated it.
(and in some ways it reminded me of the film 'brown bunny' which is way better than most people realise.)

Are we dead yet Dad?

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I thought the basic premise was interesting but there wasn't enough plot or character development to justify a 270pp novel. It would have made a decent longish short story. I'm not sure what sort of ending would not have been a cop out.

Re: Are we dead yet Dad?

[captainmushroom.livejournal.com]

I have to disagree. I felt that one of the strengths was the slowly emerging reason behind the bond, and the emergence of the father's past. I was also intrigued by the slow shift in roles between man and child. The latter's language changed over the course of the novel as his perception of reality shifted. And considering that the child served as the duo's moral guide, that's a pretty significant shift.

As you might have gathered, I really enjoyed the book. Okay, "enjoyed" might be the wrong word. I didn't exactly "enjoy" reading Blindness either, but like The Road, it was an excellent read. I think Saramago definitely did a better job, but The Road had certain appealing aspects.

One was the lack of explanation for the apocalypse. Give a reason and suddenly you have to explain the science behind it, and bingo: genre shift. Besides, since we don't know of anything that could create a complete planetary death (and still leave a few humans alive), there's not much point in trying. After all, it's the result that matters.

Certainly, this isn't an original idea -- we've seen societal breakdown explored ever so often (Lord of the Flies, Mad Max, Blindness, take your pick). But then, it's not the concept that matters so much as the exploration. And I think McCarthy did very well here, and forces the reader to confront certain personal flaws: Would we be any better? Would we leave the child in the village or the ragtag man behind? Would we resort to cannibalism to avoid starvation? Would we be able to maintain hope beyond all hopelessness?

As for the ending, it's either a cop out or horrific, depending on how you interpret it. The writing suggests an element of hope. On the other hand, there's also some indication that the people are cannibals, which doesn't really bode well for the kid. I had to take a positive interpretation in order to avoid a complete breakdown. But on further reflection, there is, of course, no hope left in a dead world -- only a degree of depravation before ultimate doom.

But the real key for me was how the book affected me. I desperately wanted to find my son and hug him every few pages. In my books, that's the mark of a well-written novel.

[ltmurnau.livejournal.com]

I read the book a couple of months ago; I am certainly not going to bother seeing the movie. I tend to agree with you in that his message is that it's important for individuals to continue to behave ethically and with integrity (the continual references to carrying the torch), even if there will be no greater or better civilisation to arise from the ashes. To abandon all moral codes is to abandon being human.

McCarthy does not ever specify what happened; in checking some references, he said in one interview that it might have been some kind of catastrophic event like a meteor striking the earth, not a nuclear war (though I remember reading my share of "nuclear winter" fiction in the 80s, and let's not forget Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle, which locked up all the water on the planet). Anyway, it's not important to the novel.

He did say that the novel was written for his (then 8 year old) son, and I think that anyone who has children would react differently to it from someone who doesn't (as captainmushroom did, I wanted to hug my son after reading it).

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I wanted to hug my son after reading it

I wanted to eat mine...

OK just kidding

[captainmushroom.livejournal.com]

I agree that it probably is a different experience for parents. And you reminded me of the "carrying the fire" bit. I found that a bit tiring. For all my praise, I should add that McCarthy wrote with all the subtlety of a Wagnerian opera.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

There's a thought. The Road, the opera. Who would write the music? Shostakovich would have been good.

[jamie-miller.livejournal.com]

"I desperately wanted to find my son and hug him every few pages."

That was pretty much my reaction. The book was very moving.

I am looking forward to the movie.

[captainmushroom.livejournal.com]

I have some reservations about the movie. I liked the book, so I am curious about it, and can see it working pretty well. But I could also see it being little more than a glorified horror flick (more disturbing than funny, though).

Have any of you seen Blindness yet? It's one book -- in a similar vein -- that I could not imagine as a movie.

[sabotabby]

I thought they did a good job with Blindness. It's impossible to capture a book like that, but they got the feel of it right, and the political allegory, and the casting was quite perfect.

[captainmushroom.livejournal.com]

I'll give it a try, then. Though, really, if they did a good job, maybe I don't actually want to see it.