I wish I could give this book 3.5 stars. I didn't find it to be bad (what I generally think of 3 star reviews), but I'm not sure it's worthy of 4 stars either. I had heard all of the hype surrounding McCarthy's "The Road," and the praise lavished upon it by publications like Rolling Stone, and Entertainment Weekly, which called it "the best book of the last 25 years." However I just didn't see that.It's certainly an interesting story. I always find post-apocalyptic and dystopian stories interesting and this one is no exception. McCarthy doesn't explain what the event was that lead to everyone's death and just brings the read straight into the thick of it. Presumably, most of the world is dead, we have no idea how, but that doesn't matter, because the focus is on the man and the boy. McCarthy doesn't want to distract us with events that do not directly affect their relationship and the story he is trying to tell, and this makes for a great narrative. It is much more interesting to conjecture on these events and leave it up to the reader than to tell us that a big plague hit. McCarthy has done an excellent job of creating a realistic look at what society (or lack of such) would be like. If all of the animals died, where would humans get food? How would they treat each other if their lives depended on it? Would humans really digress into the image portrayed in "The Road?" The real focus of this book however, is the relationship between the Man and the Boy. McCarthy uses the environmental and external backdrop of the story, especially the looming threat of brigands, to describe two people who have a lot of affection for each other, and how their relationship is defined by their situation. The reason I didn't think this was the "Book of the Century" is that there just wasn't enough there. The writing is pretty good, but there's not enough "meat" in the story. I've seen comparisons of McCarthy to Hemingway, which I can see, but even Hemingway had more plot in his novels to grasp onto, and didn't rely completely on character development. This would be okay if McCarthy did rely on his characters in "The Road," but too much of the novel (maybe 40%), is focused on mundane tasks that the characters have to do to stay alive. Further, McCarthy's unusual writing style is too distracting. Conversations between characters lack quotations, which can be very confusing, and I frequently found myself starting at the beginning to try to figure out who was talking. He also selectively uses apostrophes. Why? What is the point? I know this was done purposefully, but instead of going for some kind of symbolism or unique writing style, wouldn't it be more beneficial to make the book easier to follow?Overall, "The Road," is a very short and quick read, and I would recommend it to others. The story, while not "energetic," is certainly engaging, and is sure to appeal to a wide audience.Finished this book on the subway. I knew I had ten pages left. A lot happened (relatively to the rest of the book). The last page was just a paragraphy (spoiler..)Something about the beauty of the natural world. I left the train drained almost ready to burst into tears. But also uplifted a little. Almost stopped reading at the mid way cannibal parts...not to mention the books repitition of sleep walk worry starve find scraps. At times too dark for its own good but then faint shimmers of hope. Most disturbing is it seems just a few clicks of the clock away. I am going to give this book back to the person who lent it to me but I do not want to talk about it. Its not a "talk about" kind of book. I guess it hits into the insides. The paradox of existence , wanting to live but suffering from it. Fearing death as not just the end of life but the obliteration of it. Death erases the tape not just the end. I think the evil in this book is not really man's fault but the fault of existence. But love is also part of existence and by nurturing it the man, the son can find a filament that does not fear the eraser. It's a difficult road to get moving on McCarthy's style. I personally struggle to understand why his sometimes uses the apostrophe in contractions and doesn't at other times. At first, I couldn't figure out why he doesn't use punctuation around dialog. I really didn't get the excessive use of fragments in his description. But then his prose start flowing like poetry. The emotion, as raw as it is, gets its claws into the reader. The story is moving and in the end I found myself really enjoying McCarthy's tale of a father raising his son in imposable conditions. Buy the end, I understood why The Road won the Pulitzer. This is a terrific novel that needs little introduction. There is no use in explaining how great this book is because, as the cover shows, it was on several notable critic's list and won the Pullitzer prize. This book is so good, you could read it in one sitting and never even break a sweat. It's a page turner. The style is simple. And elegant. Poetic.I find some other reviews here hilarious! Apparently, in order to enjoy this book, some readers had, had!, to understand why the world was the way it looked... how it came to be this way. To this I ask: why? Isn't it obvious-- the ash on the wind, the dark skies, the blackened trees. Doesn't it seem fair to say that this world, our planet, has been ravaged by wars, probably nuclear. And then there is a complaint about "happy endings". What are those anyway? I thought they were just something you received from a masseuse. "Happy Endings" are a fabricated, Hollywood invention. Erase them from memory. This is Cormac McCarthy people. Happy endings... remember "No Country For Old Men"?It's been a while since I've felt on the verge of tears from reading a novel, but the relationship between son and father displayed here certainly choked me up. Could I say anymore? Probably. But that would be ruining it.I read this book in less than 24 hours. Having previously read "No Country for Old Men," I was worried I was racing through a book with no real finish. I was not disappointed. I found the story gripping and the prose beautiful; McCarthy can sure paint a picture. I am still haunted by the imagery.
|