McCarthy, Cormac: The Road

[calico_reaction]

Comments

[cataroo]

FINALLY! Someone else wasn't bowled over by this book! =)

I personally didn't really like this book, and pretty much for all the reasons you mentioned. I hated the fact that McCarthy didn't use quotation makes-- drove me absolutely bonkers. I'm all for literary SF (have you read The Sparrow? I think it would fall into this category, along with The Time Traveler's Wife), but something about this book just didn't do it for me. And everyone else raves about it.

[calico_reaction]

I fricking LOVE The Sparrow. That book didn't come to mind because I've always seen it shelved in the SF/F section of the bookstore, but you're right, it's another book that crosses genres, and does so beautifully. :)

[juushika]

This book is on my to-read list because I love the genre (both post-apoc, dystoptic, and literary sci-fi), but it's good to have a peek into what's ahead of me when I read it.

Having just finished How I Live Now (Meg Rosoff), I just had a taste of text without quotation marks—and I hated it. I can appreciate the atmosphere it creates, but it's awkward, and seems to demand more from the reader than the author as far as that atmosphere creation goes.

And—I've just been reminded to add The Time Traveler's Wife to my to-read list... and to check out The Sparrow.

[calico_reaction]

Let me know what your thoughts are on this book when you get around to reading it. I fully expected to love it because I also love the genre, but found myself disappointed anyway. Alias...

Definitely read The Time Traveler's Wife and The Sparrow. :)

[postcard_life]

I liked The Road much more than you did, but it never would have occurred to me to characterize it as science fiction. I guess I think of post-apocalyptic as a genre onto itself.

I can't remember too much about specific likes and dislikes, although I do remember that I basically read it in one setting while working on the front desk, which probably made the book affect me more like a film. This may seem odd, but I think of McCarthy's writing as masculine and cinematic, in that there's very little emotion, it's plot-driven, and the characters don't have much in the way of internal lives. I liked No Country for Old Men and The Road, but I started Blood Meridian, which is supposed to be his best work, and I put it down without finishing it.

[calico_reaction]

I haven't read his other work before, but in this case, I wouldn't say it's very plot-driven, though I'll agree with you on the cinematic feel. Obviously, the characters have a goal, but it's not a very tightly plotted one. IMHO, anyway. :)

[maggiedr]

I don't know if you saw a link posted on the Odfellow discussion group a few days ago. It went to an Atlantic Monthly article on the subject of contemporary literary writing, and McCarthy was one of the authors that got dragged into the mud. I've deleted the post so I don't have the link anymore. I was interested to read it because I've read "No Country For Old Men" and have "The Road" in my to-read stack. The stack that never dwindles

[calico_reaction]

I skim the Odfellows list for the most part, usually because I don't have the time to sit down and read the articles and really participate in the discussions as much as I'd like. I'm not surprised if McCarthy got dragged through the mud though. I've heard of a lot of SF readers being very unhappy with this particular book

[maggiedr]

Well, I should clarify that article a bit. The writer (can't remember the name) wrote a very lengthy and detailed analysis of the work of several popular literary writers, among them, Annie Proulx and Cormac McCarthy. It had nothing to do with either of the books we are discussing, I believe the book that got torn apart was "All The Pretty Horses." The writer of the article is also of the opinion that dropping punctuation is just lazy

[calico_reaction]

To my understanding, the whole POINT of the literary style of fiction SHOULD be its focus on character. And of course, the prose itself, but it's very hard for prose to shine if the author isn't following the basic rules, or at the very least, doesn't have a good reason for breaking them.

I feel bad, because I'm worried I'm staring to become a genre snob and missing out on what makes literary fiction so great. Maybe I am, maybe I'm not. I've still got some literary tales on my shelf, and time will tell. :)

If you find that article, do send it my way, if you don't mind. And I'll do the same, if I get the chance to look for it myself. :)

[myztified]

This book is on my to-read list, so your review is just fascinating. I don't read much SF and it's only on my list cause I got it for free.

Something I've noticed among literary writers, and that's the almost crippling use of passive voice and long, rambling sentences connected by any means necessary or none at all. I really, really wanted a red pen for this book.

My first thought: Faulkner!

[calico_reaction]

Oh, Faulkner... I take issue with his work, but for entirely different reasons. :) He's definitely no easy read.