Fuck your face off, The Road was amazing.

Yeah,the Road was good! How can you think scenarios like "I'm cleaning a dead man's brains off of my son"(paraphrased) are bad? The dialouge was fine. Ever hear a grown man talk to a kid? It sounds about the same.

If you didn't like The Road don't write off Cormac Mccarthy I recently just read Child of God and it is awesome! It's different from The Road too. I hear good things about Blood Meridian as well.

Cormac McCarthy is overrated period.

Alecia beat me to it, I opened this thread simply to say:

Fuck your face off!

The Road was incredible for the range of emotion it captured without resorting to cliched literary antics. That's just one reason it was great, but the one that most addresses your complaint.

touch.

I haven't even touched this book and I know I hate it. It just gives me...those vibes, looking at it in the bookstore, seeing it's name, thinking about it, reading you guys talk about it. It's not just a judging a book by it's cover thing, it's a real strong um...premonition? Like some literary spirit demon telling me to not even bother. If I told my mum about this she'd freak out and insist on explaining how I am a profit and have to learn how to tap into these spiritual realms and master this power for good, so I can do neat things like cure cancer and end terrorism. It's no fun.

I never knew there were so many ways to describe how grey things are until I read The Road.

Not exactly what I was going to say, but it's pretty eloquent so I have to copy Berto & quote it. I don't understand the complaint that nothing happens, they're suriving in a wasteland against rapists, cannibals and starvation. It's an amazing, moving book.

Loved this book. McCarthy's books are usually overly dense. This book was beautifully sparse which was an excellent reflection of the world they were in.

I wish I could join in on this discussion, but I haven't read it! =O

it's about the language, a-holes, not things 'happening'.

I still need to get my hands on a copy of Swan Song, thanks for the reminder. I love almost anything post-apocalyptic, done well.

I donno, I've got mixed views about it. I think his writing style at times is a bit crap. I get what he's trying to do but it's just not quite right, I can't really tell you why though. It is a good book though, and lots of stuff does happen in it, there's lots of action, shootings, a suicide, -SPOILER- the death of the main character. It's a good book, maybe it doesn't deserve the mountains of hype it's had but it deserves it a lot more than a lot of other hyped up books and I'm glad people are reading it.

So do I...there's some good stuff out there.

I enjoy Cormac's language (especially his complete lack of quotation marks to indicate the pointless banter between father and son), but the guy can't create a plot to save his life. A father and son wandering around aimlessly eating beans is fucking boring. You can use interesting, elevated language to describe some guy taking a shit, but that doesn't mean it's a story worth telling.

And I loved "Old Country" until the entire plot disintegrated at the end. The story dragged out way too long after the obvious conclusion to the action. It was almost as if he had no idea how to end the story.

It took me until the last few pages of the book to really fall in love with it. The whole time I was thinking, "okokokok is something going to happen?" After it was over, it sort of settled in and I really felt I'd "gotten" it, if I could say that.

I've said this a hundred times, but after I finished it (all in one sitting), I put it down and WEPT. I am not a weeper. This is probably the only book/movie that has moved me that much. It could be because I've got a kid and it hit home, but it will always be an important book to me because it was the first to really hit me hard.

But it's what DID happen that made it all come together cohesively for me. If the the man hadn't died and the boy didn't try to be brave and defend himself and his dead father, I don't think I'd have felt satisfied with it.

I don't get the "nothing happened" criticism.

Timberly, as a parent, I think that's why it moved me, too. I finished it, WEPT, then read it again right away.

Well, now I'm definitely never gonna read it!!

I thought it was great.

it is a moving and beautifully written novel, from the very first dreamscape to the vivid ending of the boy and the strange man. it is not a plot driven story. i can imagine many clancy fans wouldnt care much for it, maybe even be equally pissed. it is, though, a testament of human capacity and sentimentality. and we have a full discussion on this book from a few months ago and if you have subscribed to the bookclub, you can find it here:

http://chuckpalahniuk.net/group/official-cult-book-club/june-09-discussi...

we have 31 posts in that discussion and there's always room for more.

oh, and rahvin, welcome to the cult !!

-kabol

..

oh. maybe.

I liked it,the writing syle is definatly hard to get into, which has prevented me from reading no country

No Country was written like a script and I felt read like I was watching the movie, and The Road, while admittedly dense, has some of the most beautiful descriptions of a shattered landscape and the relationship between father and son of any book around. While I'm not a father, I get the sense that this book will hit home a lot harder to an older demographic as they will know the fear of leaving a child behind in a world filled with dangerous unknowns. Someone mentioned so many ways to describe grey, and that's true, but only Cormac could fill a book with grey and still make it so beautiful and so tragic. I think this quote from the book grasps the concept best

"The counter spectacle of things ceasing to be."

As for the dialogue, the other guy nailed it; talking to a kid is repetition. Now if you think about it, talking to a kid who was born after "the event" and has only spoken to you is going to be FAR different than two chaps bantering about a sitcom or musing about life and other father/son bullshit. Add to that the fact that they are starving to death, tired, and about to give up on life...I don't think they are going to want to talk about...oh wait...the kid doesn't even know what birds are or anything but rubble and debris, so that limits the conversation all the way down to repetitive reassurance and commands.

I generally don't like to include other people in posts but rahvinoaysius comes off as a typical boring hater. You make no true arguments except that, in your opinion, the book was, "the most boring piece of garbage I've read in a long time." Well I'm sorry if there wasn't a car chase or a bomb-disarming scene or a witting "did you fuck my wife!?" dialogue...it's a book about the end of the world and a dying father coming to grips with leaving an ill-prepared son behind. So you are correct in one sense, no one can tell you your opinion is wrong, it's yours, enjoy it...You just come off as a typical negative person who can't handle a book's pace that isn't on par with movies of today.

Nothin happens because almost everyone is dead...that's the point. You don't win a pulitzer prize for writing a Michael Bay movie. Good luck with those opinions...

Wait, you thought The Road was dense? What?

+1
(but it's a very dense 1!!)

the road was unflinchingly sparse, and that was integral to it's magic.

I found the book to be packed with descriptions...Making it seem dense. I tend to like a good description but some folks can't handle a mental image. The book is sparse in dialogue but what fills up the rest of the pages? Lots and lots of dense descriptions. That was the part I really enjoyed, it was like walking through the landscape because there were so many written illustrations, musings, and lamentations that, while nothing was technically going on (e.g. walking walking and more walking because thats what you have to do) there was so much going on in the man's mind that it was like a jungle of words you hack through and everyone takes it in in different ways.

I agree. The Road is really a testament to the fact that you don't need a lot of words to get the story and characters across, you just need the right words. I really enjoyed it's minimal style, and I think that it was perfect for the spare, post-apocalyptic setting McCarthy was creating. If it had been a five or six hundred page brick, I don't think it would have been anywhere near as effective.

really? you wanna talk overblown? go read RAGTIME by doctorow, or perhaps that goat-fuck that is OBLIVION by david foster wallace? or... no, more overblown than all of the above: AMERICAN PASTORAL. that one won the pulitzer. in fact, if you look up what it takes to win that particular over-valued award, roth wrote it just for that purpose. otherwise, what im really trying to say is: that book is almost unreadably bad, and people not only whack off to it, but teach it in university.

I don't know about "ever," but definitely overrated. Great writing, except I hate his run-on sentences and need to get used to them every time I read one of his books. I think the best thing about his writing is the dialogue. Quotations really aren't necessary in his books. I instantly know whenever a character begins to speak. It's like he has a magic power or something. The lack of apostrophes in his contractions annoys the shit out of me though.

The book had a dull plot, repetitive plot. I can often read and enjoy books with dull plots if I love the prose style (Stephen Dixon books are often like that), but it didn't work for me here. While with a book like No Country for Old Men, I was able to enjoy it because of its pulpy plot.

I think readers who are really into great descriptions of scenery would definitely get a lot more out of The Road than readers who don't really care.

Fuck, your attitude is getting tiresome, Chuck. I've said this in another thread, too, so it may feel like I'm attacking you. I'm not. But seriously, dude, get that shit in check. All you do is fucking whinge and complain about shit and tell everyone how something else, something they're not talking about, is soooooo much better or whatever. It's like all you come here to do his piss your opinions all over the wall and then fuck off.

Kit, you nailed it. The Road was a beautiful book.

im merely pointing out books which are moreso overblown than THE ROAD, which is, slightly maybe yes. and according to the criteria for winning the pulitzer, almost not even eligible. it may be a fine book, and one of my favorite books in recent years. do i think it should be looked at as a benchmark, or anything? or even as mccarthy's masterwork? probably not. it's a good book, though. so i take offense (even if just slightly) to the idea that it was badly written. especially since there are so many other things out there which are of lesser quality (see also: the above mentioned) and no one seems to want to go anywhere near those with a ten foot pole. so yeah, if you want to call that me "pissing out my opinion" then go the fuck ahead, sir.

if you feel in some way slighted that i "pissed" all over wallace, doctorow, momaday, carver, or anyone else i might have mentioned even slightly in a negative light, then you have that right, but fuck you for just being a dick about it.

Dude, it's the fact that you're always being a dick about it. Always calling out something or someone. Your negativity is fucking draining, man. Even on Facebook. The only times we've ever spoken, in chat on there, has been because you've posed a question complaining about a teacher or a book you have to read or a band or a disability policy or some shit. It's just tiring.

Your post was a little startling in it's vehemence, Atomos. Otherwise my only problem is that it was a little off topic.

I found American Pastoral to be wonderful. I was moved by its characters, impressed by the way Roth handled the context in which the story was set, and amazed by how intelligently the narrator steps out of the narrative a third of the way into the book and never reappears. Why did you hate it so much? Can you formulate it?

i hadnt realized phil took off. but for some reason, american pastoral never bleeped on my radar. so im gonna pick it up in the morning and burn through it while i await tobaccosmgoat. if chuck hates it and phil loves it, there's gotta be something there, because i seldom completely agree with either of you and also seldom completely disagree either haha glad yaw had that tiff

when you get through some of it, let me know if you've figured on why you think i hate it. i may hold my point-by-point back, just to see how the discussion develops without it, especially since i dont want to really influence the way anyone reads it.

I loved it too, so throw that in the mix!

It made me cry... So there's that. And I'm back and forth on the writing style. Sometimes I think it could be better (or different? I don't know). Other times I think it is perfect.

Overall, I think it was a really really good / beautiful book.

'American Pastoral' or 'The Road'?

Oh, The Road... Sorry, I just realized you guys were talking about American Pastoral...

Will American Pastoral make me cry to?

Probably not but it is good.

I thought The Road was brilliant. But I wasn't in it for the story so much as Cormac McCarthy's mastery of the language. That said? I dug the story too.

I tend to agree with the original poster above. "The Road" is an overrated novel. The style of the author blends dialogue and descriptions to the point that you don't have the slightest idea who does the talking. The second thing that was extremely annoying was the fact that the characters say "Okay" alot.

Let's go find food. Okay?
Okay.
Okay?
Okay. Let's go.
Okay.
Are you okay?
I'm Okay.
Okay.

This goes on and on, and by the middle of the book you notice that the little boy finishes each and every sentence with "Okay"...
The third thing I noticed is that there aren't any apostrophes in the text. As I read online, this was so intended by the author so I'm not pressing my finger against it.
The best plus I can give "The Road" is the atmosphere it creates. The descriptions and the visions it depicts. Other than that, on a scale of one to ten, I'd give this one a 6.

This is how young children talk when the day is made up of one task after another, which the father necessarily used to keep his son close, and to some degree sheltered.