Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cormac McCarthy's personal library

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 149 posts

Re: Cormac McCarthy's personal library

#31

Post by aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA »

BrenBarn wrote: post #26
justupvoting wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope, at least, you managed to watch the films before you had an opinion on them. Tarantino's, I mean. The Road is not a violent or pessimistic book, tho there is violence and pessimism in it. Don't confuse the set and the setting. Why write about, 'the worst among us'? Some art (and Cormac tottered over the line between wrought and overwrought plenty) is about finding meaning in the margins, in the edge cases. The…

I think it's a stretch to call The Road optimistic.

It’s quite a stretch.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's personal library

#33

Post by metadat »

aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA wrote: post #29
ChanningAllen wrote: post #22

This article makes me want to cry. I'm an unbelievably big Cormac McCarthy fan and the findings in his library shed so much light on many inscrutable and poetic passages from his books. I think for example about the following quote from the judge, an insatiably curious (and evil) character from Blood Meridian: > Whatever exists, he said. Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent. Corm…

I think that’s an allusion to the Gnostic demiurge.

For the uninitiated (like me!):

TL;DR: An old testament reference to the "malevolent god". E.g. "god in the old testament wasn't so nice or forgiving.."

> In Gnosticism, the Demiurge is the lesser creator god who fashioned the material world and is often seen as the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh. Unlike the supreme, unknowable God, the Demiurge is ignorant, imperfect, and sometimes malevolent, responsible for the flaws of the physical world and the imprisonment of the divine spark within humans. Gnostic beliefs see a spiritual journey not as submitting to the Demiurge, but as a process of escaping his creation to return to the true, good God.

See also: https://gnosticismexplained.org/the-gnostic-demiurge/

Re: Cormac McCarthy's personal library

#34

Post by username223 »

groos wrote: post #19
dzuc wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only book I've ever read in a single sitting.

After reading the Road, I started on Blood Meridian and could not continue, swearing never to read McCarthy again. The man's soul was just too dark.

If you think "Blood Meridian" is dark, try "Child of God." I'm a huge McCarthy fan, but "Blood Meridian" is tough to appreciate. "The Road," "No Country for Old Men," and "All the Pretty Horses" are his most readable works; try them, then decide how much farther you want to go.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's personal library

#36

Post by username223 »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #4

"McCarthy’s detractors, meanwhile, found his writing overly mannered, his characters overly masculine, and accused him of relishing the violence he wrote about so vividly." Yeah, maybe his detractors were on to something. I haven't even started "The Road" because of its reputation. I have only read "Child of God" and wondered why someone might write about the worst among us. But then I'm not a fan of Quentin Tarantin…

"Child of God?" You started at just about the darkest, least approachable place. Try "No Country for Old Men" or "All the Pretty Horses," both of which are far easier to read and contemplate.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's personal library

#37

Post by sharkweek »

rgrieselhuber wrote: post #17
JKCalhoun wrote: post #4

"McCarthy’s detractors, meanwhile, found his writing overly mannered, his characters overly masculine, and accused him of relishing the violence he wrote about so vividly." Yeah, maybe his detractors were on to something. I haven't even started "The Road" because of its reputation. I have only read "Child of God" and wondered why someone might write about the worst among us. But then I'm not a fan of Quentin Tarantin…

I've always gotten the sense from McCarthy that he was keenly aware that civilization is not just something to take for granted and that there is always something dangerous at the edges that needs to be carefully guarded against.

100%

His worldview seemed to be that humans as a species are extremely violent and capable of the most inhumane acts and we’re hanging on by a thread. Some of his writing often covered what just a slight altering of our societal moral compass might look like.

Probably my favorite author of all time, him or maybe Delilo.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's personal library

#38

Post by bexsella »

BrenBarn wrote: post #26
justupvoting wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope, at least, you managed to watch the films before you had an opinion on them. Tarantino's, I mean. The Road is not a violent or pessimistic book, tho there is violence and pessimism in it. Don't confuse the set and the setting. Why write about, 'the worst among us'? Some art (and Cormac tottered over the line between wrought and overwrought plenty) is about finding meaning in the margins, in the edge cases. The…

I think it's a stretch to call The Road optimistic.

I would argue that the ending of the book is optimistic despite the event that precedes it. An imperfect father wants the best for his child, and does the best he can with the hand he's dealt. In a dying world of cannibals and worse, there are people who are good, and whose surroundings don't poison their view on what it means to be good. "Do you carry the fire?" is, to my mind, an incredibly optimistic sentiment.

Re: Cormac McCarthy's personal library

#39

Post by phendrenad2 »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #4

"McCarthy’s detractors, meanwhile, found his writing overly mannered, his characters overly masculine, and accused him of relishing the violence he wrote about so vividly." Yeah, maybe his detractors were on to something. I haven't even started "The Road" because of its reputation. I have only read "Child of God" and wondered why someone might write about the worst among us. But then I'm not a fan of Quentin Tarantin…

I have a theory that everyone has a different level of detachment vs self-insertion when consuming a fictional narrative. Those more self-insertive probably shouldn't read his books.
Post reply on HN