Thread 24840754

1) Write four or five very beautiful passages and save them
2) Make sure to write without punctuation and use long, run on sentences with lots of ands
3) Set up an amazing plot line that drives your reader to finish only to kill off your protagonists with either real deaths or spiritual ones
4) Reveal your true protagonist to be the "cold, godless universe, slowly eroding men's hopes and dreams with it's greatest weapon, time"
5) Sprinkle the sentences you wrote above in the dull parts of the book, saving the best two for last
5) Profit


This guy is overrated as hell

>1), 3) & 4)
>easy

Oh yeah very easy to do this.
Also, none of that explains why he's overrated.

>>24840754 (OP)
filtered

>>24840754 (OP)
>3) Set up an amazing plot line that drives your reader to finish only to kill off your protagonists with either real deaths or spiritual ones
Sounds pretty good to me.

>>24841086
>Make sure to write without punctuation and use long, run on sentences with lots of ands

>>24840754 (OP)
>Travel to another country for half a year just to research the area you are writing about
>Also read hundreds of history books as research
>Spend 20 years writing and revising it
>Embed hundreds of covert allusions to the occult and philosophy so the reader can absorb new universal truths subconsciously.

Yea sure, easy.

>>24841208
>describes kino

>>24841086
Every story he wrote is basically the same. Do you think it was possible for him to write something uplifting?

>>24841302
Yes. But that also doesn't mean he's overrated even if he couldn't. Every great author circles the same few themes.

>>24841302
>Do you think it was possible for him to write something uplifting?
I don't think so. McCarthy's worlview is pretty bleak. To the point I don't think he ever truly loved anyone. Hard to write uplifting stuff if you're unable to truly love.

>>24841308
Love? What's that?

McCarthy thought love was just another human illusion that prevented us from seeing the objective nihilist reality of the universe. Trouble is, he's wrong. The universe or God or whatever you want to believe in brought us to here, and I'm assuming there are people you love or love you in your life, so it has at least some grace.

>>24841344
>he's wrong
Oh shit, thanks for clearing that up.

>>24841307
Look, there are far more talented writers who don't get anywhere near the publicity because they don't write Coen brothers movies.

>>24841345
Imagine writing about the nihilism of the universe while basking in your wealth in your country estate with your 20 000 volume library

>>24841344
>the objective nihilist reality of the universe
I think this is an unfair portrayal of McCarthy's views. He always seemed like a Dosto-esque existentialist Christian to me

>>24841349
What does that have to do with anything? Being rich doesn't change his view of the universe. If anything it might enforce it because he got everything he ever wanted and still felt empty.

>>24841356
Nonono what you write about and what your characters say are your personality and beliefs.

>>24841356
Lol you need to go back and re-read, you missed it completely

>>24841346
Still doesn't mean he's overrated. He deserved his work to be adapted and the success he had.

>>24841357
Teenage angst might be impressive to some people but I got over it before I became an adult. I guess some people never grow up.

>>24841370
Oh okay.

>>24841346
>there are far more talented writers who don't get anywhere near the publicity because they don't write Coen brothers movies.
You're retarded

>>24841388
You don't think there's some truth to this? He was basically unknown until his writing became popular during the grunge period of the 90s, which coincidentally was peak American nihilism.

>>24841407
His sudden popularity did not spring from the masses accepting him. It came from the snobbiest among the literati's regret at not acknowledging a book like Blood Meridian when it came along. It was then that Atph, his most accessible work till date, was pushed to high heavens by his publishing house. As I said, you are too retarded for art. To you, anything that has violence must be edgy and nihilistic, because the contrary would mean that blood and violence are real, which you don't understand.

>>24840754 (OP)
>easy path to fame
1) write a story about a drunk Irishman falling off a ladder
2) write the entire thing in gibberish and nonsensical compound words
3) randomly insert 100 character made up words
4) have then ending lead back to the beginning
5) bait people into reading it by claiming 2DEEP4U!!!
6) Sprinkle in cryptic metaphors
7) Prophet (see what I did there? I used a word to that sounds like another word to convey dual meaning literally 2 smart 4 u)

James Joyce is the biggest troll who ever lived. And his magnum opus openly mocks the entire literally tradition.

>>24840754 (OP)
I can't fucking stand McCarthy's lack of punctuation, and think his reasoning for it is pretentious wank. But his use of language is genuinely impressive. He's certainly overrated, but primarily in the way that anyone with a valid claim to Greatness ends up being held up as the be-all and end-all by their most midwitted fans.
And in McCarthy's case, those fans are usually middle-aged burnouts that are already insufferable to talk to.

>>24841483
>middle-aged burnouts that are already insufferable to talk to.
Man, what did I do to you?

>>24841483
I can't fucking stand Joyce's lack of preexisting words, and think his reasoning for it is pretentious wank. But his use of language is genuinely impressive. He's certainly overrated, but primarily in the way that anyone with a valid claim to Greatness ends up being held up as the be-all and end-all by their most midwitted fans.
And in Joyce's case, those fans are usually middle-aged burnouts that are already insufferable to talk to

>>24841461
To you, anything with violence is profound and meaningful because you're so dopamine drained it's impossible to feel anything about anything else. Hate to break it to you, but that's not art appreciation despite how special your motherly internal narratives are telling you you are.

>>24841483
t. The Filtered

>>24841483
>his use of language is genuinely impressive

Sometimes it is. He's not a bad writer. But great writers have the self-criticism to stop themselves from writing nonsense like the following

>He rose and stood tottering in that cold autistic dark with his arms outheld for balance while the vestibular calculations in his skull cranked out their reckonings

McCarthy's entire canon can be broken down into the idea that "The world you want isn't the world as it is," usually spoken by an old Mexican philosopher peasant. The first time you see No Country for Old Men, it's an interesting idea done well. Once you get through a few more of his books, you realize there isn't much else he ever said.

>>24841505
>>anything with violence is profound and meaningful because you're so dopamine drained it's impossible to feel anything about anything else. Hate to break it to you, but that's not art appreciation despite how special your motherly internal narratives are telling you you are.
>retard immediately jumps to midwittery
As I said, you're retarded. You don't have the intelligence to discern what art means, so you think all violence must necessarily be unartistic.

>>24841524
All great writers have shit like that in their works. Everyone from Shakespeare to melville to hardy to conrad to faulkner

>>24841524
>it’s real

>>24841601
>so you think all violence must necessarily be unartistic
Never said that, but you're making it increasingly clear you don't have the intellect to establish a higher bar for art

>>24841610
And McCarthy more than most. I heard someone call his prose "clean" before and I laughed out loud. He has some of the dirtiest, most pretentious rambling prose in all of literature, with sparse moments of intense clarity. Maybe the juxtaposition is what appeals to the midwits, I dunno.

>>24841682
That's bullshit. There is a reason just that passage is always picked from The Road. There aren't others for which you won't have to reach real hard to label them pretentious. You just might be a midwit who can't appreciate good prose. Faulkner, for example, has way more unjustified nonsense in nearly every book he wrote

>>24841712
Can you give us any examples of slop from Faulkner or other greats? The McCarthy passage almost made me laugh out loud

>>24841666
That's exactly what you said, but you're retarded so you probably don't even get what you said. Enough of your waffle.
>>24841682
Try reading the book in its entirety before posting nonsense. No one in their right mind could actually think that something like the Border trilogy is pretentious or rambling for its entirety. It's 90% stripped back but elegant prose. Only a midwit would criticize a writer without reading him.

>>24841718
There literally was a thread on it recently
>The river itself is not a hundred yards across, and pa and Vernon and Vardaman and Dewey Dell are the only things in sight not of that single monotony of desolation leaning with, that terrific quality a little from right to left, as though we had reached the place where the motion of the wasted world accelerates just before the final precipice. Yet they appear dwarfed. It is as though the space between us were time: an irrevocable quality. It is as though time, no longer running straight before us in a diminishing line, now runs parallel between us like a looping string, tie distance being the doubling accretion of the thread and not the interval between. The mules stand, their fore quarters already sloped a little, their romps high. They too are breathing now with a deep groaning sound; looking back once, their gaze sweeps across us with in their eyes a wild, sad, profound and despairing quality as though they had already seen in the thick water the shape of the disaster which they could not speak and we could not see.

I mean Faulkner is waffling like 40% of the time. Perhaps you should read books instead of picking which writers you like based on goodreads.

>>24841718
Do you really want me to open Ulysses? Because this thread would hit bump limit if we are being unbiased, let's be real.

>>24841733
Shrug. Admittedly I’ve only read the sound and the fury but I thought it was lucid and beautiful. No need for insults man. Anyways yeah that passage is really pretentious and hard to read. Thanks.

>>24841752
Absalom, Absalom! is like that cranked up to 11. But I'd say it works in many places. That's what you are ignoring. This sort of "pretentiousness" will hardly always hit the mark, but that's why great writers attempt them. That's what makes them great writers. A worse writer won't have these passages because he would never attempt writing them, because he isn't great enough to pull them off to begin with.

>>24841718
Another absolute beaut

>The survivors lay quietly in that cratered void and watched the whitehot stars go rifling down the dark. Or slept with their alien hearts beating in the sand like pilgrims exhausted upon the face of the planet Anareta, clutched to a namelessness wheeling in the night.

>path to fame
Ngmi

>>24840754 (OP)
>This guy is overrated as hell
>Only read his most reddit book
How about you read his actual masterpiece

>>24841727
Quote me where I said violence can't be artistic. Trouble is violence is ALL MCCARTHY DID. There's nothing else to it. The world is violent and bad men win despite your childish pretensions. Wow, so deep, amazingly artistic for the 12th time in a row.

>>24841302
Every book is a remix of the same two baker's dozen of letters.

>>24841779
>Trouble is violence is ALL MCCARTHY DID.
So you're both retarded and also never read him?

>>24841774
>wah wah, I used to love the Wolf but now the Universe in its cold brutality has made me hard and bitter

I've read most of his stuff. This is high school shit, bro. The emo ramblings of an immature rich kid who never got over the existentialists.

>>24841783
Go ahead, name some other themes he wrote about that aren't "the Universe is one way, you want it another"

>>24841768
This is pretty good. Do you know the concept of an epic? It's affecting a similar tone. You can't group this with "autistic dark". May as well post the entire book, and all the other highly stylized classics, because they are not written in stripped back, hard boiled prose.

>>24841733
>>24841752
Controversial take here I guess but I actually liked it, although I agree the part about “time running parallel between them” and like a looping thread & doubling the accretion (…???) is super opaque. But in context Darl, the narrator of this specific passage, is supposed to be incredibly intelligent yet also veering into insanity. I guess it’s similar to Quentin Compson in that way except in Quentin’s case it’s violent suicidal depression and for Darl it’s more like eventual psychosis.
>>24841767
Well said.

>>24841788
I would but you're too retarded to recognize them so what's the point

>>24841803
I didn't think so, because there are none.

>>24841794
I think that poster was actually sincerely praising that passage. It is a nice sleeker little passage of McCarthy’s.

>>24841797
Now that I think about it, I wasn’t considering the narrator at all. How many of Benjy’s or Quentin’s passages would sound insane without any context? Now I think this passage makes a lot more sense.

>>24841810
No I fucking was not. It's the cringiest passage in Blood Meridian, some vague headnod to the eigth astrological house of Virgo or whatever isn't deep. It's pretentious slop.

>>24841808
You're retarded. To say nothing of the fact that the tenet you have already brushed aside is deep enough that everyone from Leopardi to Cioran were wrestling with it their whole lives.

>>24841774
>The wolf had crossed the international boundary line at about the point where it intersected the thirtieth minute of the one hundred and eighth meridian.

Lol

>>24841816
Damn, I’m pretty embarrassed now. I’m gonna get my dominatrix to punish me with a swift kick to the nuts for that, don’t fret, anon.

>>24841822
You don't need to be that masochistic. Just re-read a Cormac McCarthy novel as your punishment.

>>24841819
I know you, you're the optical democracy (smfh) poster.

>>24841821
You're too stupid for it, but that passage in its entirety and how it fits into the rest of the book is a clear demonstration of how the so-called Omniscient narrator of The Crossing isn't fully reliable.

>>24841833
Deep man, DEEP

>>24841830
All of them went over your head, or you wouldn't be posting this retardation here today.

>>24841834
Go read your goosebumps

>>24841774
I wish they'd adapt this instead of Outer Dark and BM

>>24841836
Bruh, understanding this guy's books doesn't make you intelligent. He makes it impossible to miss the point, to a fault. Art doesn't have to be subtle, but it also shouldn't have to be bashed into your head with a brick....twelve separate times.

>>24841752
le pretentious

Never seen someone so actually filtered before.

>>24841848
>this post coming from someone who doesn't even understand what he is reading
It's less him bashing your head over with his philosophy and more you being too much of a knucklehead to understand anything beyond a one line sentence you read on reddit, describing his works. If you read my posts on optical democracy, you'd know in your heart that you didn't have the intelligence to figure it out yourself. That speaks to your (in)ability with actual subtlety. Nothing is subtle to a retard, because he believes that nothing exists beyond his understanding, which is a laughable proposition.

I don't even have to go and justify art and its dependence on ideas. You don't even understand how ideas work to begin with.

>>24841857
Ideas are filler; art's only about feels

>>24841857
You say this about every criticiser of your favorite Charlie but never say why. What this usually means is that you're personally offended that some other brain you've come into contact with wasn't as moved as you were by the pretenious, one dimensional shit he writes. We get it, you love him and want to suck his cock but maybe expand your literary horizons a bit and you'll start to see he's as overrated as some people say.

>>24840754 (OP)
>When he woke in the woods in the dark and the cold of the night he'd reach out to touch the child sleeping beside him. Nights dark beyond darkness and the days more gray each one than what had gone before. Like the onset of some cold glaucoma dimming away the world.

So the night was cold, and dark, even darker than dark. Probably colder than cold, too, right? Also it was as dark as glaucoma. Even the days were dark. And cold.

Fuck outta here with this shit.

Wow,

>>24840754 (OP)
>When he woke in the woods in the dark and the cold of the night he'd reach out to touch the child sleeping beside him. Nights dark beyond darkness and the days more gray each one than what had gone before. Like the onset of some cold glaucoma dimming away the world.

So the night was cold, and dark, even darker than dark. Probably colder than cold, too, right? Also it was as dark as glaucoma. Even the days were dark. And cold.

Fuck outta here with this shit.

>>24841869
I am better read than everyone in this thread put together. It's why my appraisal of Mccarthy holds way more value than your retarded screechings. You're just mad because I pointed out how you're nowhere near as as smart (lol) as you think you are.

>>24841880
What an interesting book that would be to write it like that.

>>24841880
This is good writing

>>24841893
NTA but well read people do not browse /lit/ so this is not saying much

>>24841893
You don't have to be smart to correctly think McCarthy is one-dimensional and boring, but you might have to be super fucking smart to wrongly think he's interesting and artistic.

>>24841898
>good writing

Bruh this is high school tier

>>24841899
See>>24841388

>copious amounts of reddit spacing in nearly all his posts
As if anyone needed proof that this retarded faggot is a redditor.

>>24841929
Truly, who can argue with logic like that?

>>24841893
>>24841833
Oh I get you now. You read publicly available master's theses and then come in here and LARP like you have a higher-order understanding of the literature than anyone else. Probably the most pathetic thing I've ever seen desu. Get a fuckin job.

https://digital.library.txst.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/e53039dc-95f3-4447-a1f7-5e0fa94213da/content

>>24841472
you just dont get it mayne

>>24841953
Good job finding something that might actually help deal with your retardation. But if you actually read the book you won't need a thesis to prick up your ears on the presence of an unreliable narrator. The very passage quoted to full gives it away.

>>24841941
What logic, redditor? You keep spamming "le high school tier", when you haven't even written anything on that level, let alone published something.

>>24841980
Ya ya blah blah it's a story about stories and the prot is trying to find his own story until the end when it's finally revealed. This really isn't that interesting.

Once, there were brook trout…

>>24841472
Filtered, you have to be Irish and heavily intoxicated at 2am after the worst day of your life to get it.

>>24841774
That’s not Suttree, besides he’s decent at best.

>>24840754 (OP)
Someone post it.

>>24841601
Genuinely curious about your opinion of what art means and what constitutes good art

for me, its outer dark & child of god

>>24841302
>Do you think it was possible for him to write something uplifting?
Yeah, The Road.

>>24842360
I dunno if I should even tell you....

the book where at the end the father dies and leaves his pre-adolescent kid alone at the beach in an apocalyptic wasteland, presumably to become some cannibals food. The vision he has of his child being found is his death-rattle; it's not real. The kid is left alone at the end. That was too dark even for McCarthy

>>24842400
You didn't read the book.

>>24842407
I read it more closely than you apparently lol. The kid going off with the stranger is the father's vision. It's not real.

>>24842410
You just made that up, it doesn't matter how "closely" you read the book.

>>24842417
I didn't make it up at all. The narrator never changes from the father's POV until the very end couple of paragraphs where he's talking about fish.

>>24842430
So what? The father died, the narrator is following the boy now. The father is cold and stiff at the end. There's no opportunity for that interpretation.

>>24842443
This is McCarthy we're talking about here bro, the kid gets eaten

>>24842476
I read what the page says.

>>24842484
You read what the father, and the reader, wanted throughout the whole book. But like every McCarthy book, there's the way you want it, and the way it is.

>>24842510
But that's not what the words say. It cannot be the way you say because the words contradict that entirely. You couldn't possibly know otherwise, which is why I said you made it up. The poster above asked if McCarthy can write an uplifting story, and I answered that he did, but your argument is that the words do not mean what they are, that's unintelligible. Even more so, your argument is that McCarthy can't write an uplifting story because he writes mostly tragedies, except in this case, where you say it's not uplifting because the others aren't uplifting, it's circular.

>>24842529
It's hard I know, you'll eventually process it, or won't.

>>24842537
You're not even providing any evidence for this at all. I reread the last few pages just to make sure I didn't miss something, there's nothing that indicates this is a vision of anything.

>>24842542
There are two forms of narration in the book, not three.

You left out his insane vocabulary. Imitating that prose isn't easy especially. continually. Also suttree is his best

>>24841302
Suttree had plenty of uplifting moments albeit it still grounded itself in a changing world

>>24841356
Yeah I always thought there was an enormous value for religious enlightenment in a lot of his writing. He doesn't say church and priests are perfect but he understands faith

>>24841779
You clearly haven't read Suttree if you think he's all violence. That book is dense with character. It covers love, religion, death, aimlessness, fatherhood, friendship, fishing.

>another Faulkner/McCarthy seethe thread
newfags getting filtered by these two does not bode well for this board

>>24842008
You're retarded, ofc it isn't interesting to you.

>>24841880
Is this reallllly that different from the famous "It was a dark and stormy night"?

>>24842133
>another contrarian retard

>>24843072
Ya it's worse

>>24843238
None of you idiots ever make comment about the lines themselves, you just judge them, dumbly.
Why is it worse? What is wrong with it?

>>24841880
This is such a bad reading, it reminds of that one study of literacy among English majors where they couldn't understand even the first paragraph of Bleak House. So /lit/ has people like that, interesting.

>>24843072
Yes. It is different. It was a dark and stormy night is just a purple description of weather. Winds, rain, etc. Over and over. This opening establishes the two characters, their relationship, the setting. "Dark beyond darkness" is not a literal description of the night being dark, its a metaphorical introduction to the evil that permeates the story. The darkness is the cannibals and trying to survive the apocalypse. The darkness isnt the sky. And the "cold glaucoma dimming the world" is a fucking beautiful expression. It's original, it paints an image, likening the fallout to glaucoma, it sets the tone and establishes the main theme of the story, that the apocalypse is causing a sickness over the survivors, not a physical sickness, but a spiritual one. He does all this in a few short sentences and all you see is "Dark. Cold. Dark. Cold. Dark. Uh huh. I am very smart." Get the fuck out of here.

I dont even like The Road. It's pretty mediocre compared to McCarthy's other stuff. But goddamn, pull your head out of your ass. This isnt some YA novel where every sentence is literal. You need to turn your fucking brain on.

>>24841880
>Simple discriptive opening passage???
>ONE (1) metaphor???
>Fuck outta here with this shit!

>>24843244
>>24843327
McCarthy just relies on his narrators too much to do the heavy lifting via careful descriptions of the environment. It's best to report the setting and events and allow the reader to respond to the content appropriately

>>24843327
>>24843252

This is what I meant when I said you had to be super smart to think this guy is a genius. One has to dance around in intellectual circles, casting spells on his writing in hopes it will morph into something more meaningful than what it is.
>"Dark beyond darkness" is not a literal description of the night being dark, its a metaphorical introduction to the evil that permeates the story. The darkness is the cannibals and trying to survive the apocalypse. The darkness isnt the sky. And the "cold glaucoma dimming the world" is a fucking beautiful expression. It's original, it paints an image, likening the fallout to glaucoma, it sets the tone and establishes the main theme of the story, that the apocalypse is causing a sickness over the survivors, not a physical sickness, but a spiritual one.
What a hot pile of read-in bullshit. McCarthy himself would cringe and laugh at this, tell you you're reading too much into it, and urge you to do something better with your time. "Dark beyond darkness" is nothing more than laziness, or perhaps his dumbing down of it for the reader (he has admitted as much in the construction of the Road), and "glaucoma" is a disease of the eye.

>>24843252
Irony

>>24843244
>The sky was blue, bluer than the bluest blue (blue like my feelings). She had gone, and left only coat hangers in the closet. The closet was empty like, well, like an empty closet (like my heart). The anorexic day was eating away at me (anorexic, because I'm wasting away with sorrow).

>>24843968
You're painfully retarded and a redditor to boot. Reading is not a hobby for retards. Quit

>>24841774
>>24841821

>He looked out down the road and he looked toward the fading light. Darkening shapes of cloud all along the northern rim. It had ceased raining in the night and a broken rainbow or watergall stood out on the desert in a dim neon bow and he looked again at the road which lay as before yet more dark and darkening still where it ran on to the east and where there was no sun and there was no dawn and when he looked again toward the north the light was drawing away faster and that noon in which he'd woke was now become an alien dusk and now an alien dark and the birds that flew had lighted and all had hushed once again in the bracken by the road. He walked out. A cold wind was coming down off the mountains. It was shearing off the western slopes of the continent where the summer snow lay above the timberline and it was crossing through the high fir forests and among the poles of the aspens and it was sweeping over the desert plain below. It had ceased raining in the night and he walked out on the road and called for the dog. He called and called. Standing in that inexplicable darkness. Where there was no sound anywhere save only the wind. After a while he sat in the road. He took off his hat and placed it on the tarmac before him and he bowed his head and held his face in his hands and wept. He sat there for a long time and after a while the east did gray and after a while the right and godmade sun did rise, once again, for all and without distinction.

>>24844130
>"They rode on and the sun in the east flushed pale streaks of light and then a deeper run of color like blood seeping up in sudden reaches flaring planewise and where the earth drained up into the sky at the edge of creation the top of the sun rose out of nothing like the head of a great red phallus until it cleared the unseen rim and sat squat and pulsing and malevolent behind them."

See what he did here? The sun made a color like blood, like the rest of the book! Violence and blood! And then he does something absolutely genius, he calls the sun a dick! Haha! But he uses a different word I rarely hear, phallus, which calls out to the Greeks (obvious reference to classical literature here) and to Freud, whose psychological theories were popular at the time. What a genius! It really doesn't get any better than that.

>>24843968
>”glaucoma" is a disease of the eye
The darkness of the dying world is being compared to the dimming vision of a dying person. Glaucoma mostly affects people in their twilight years.
Comparing darkness and blindness is not “dancing around in intellectual circles,” just turn off the lights in your room and close your eyes, and see if you can dance your way to understanding the similarities there.

>>24844060
Yeah, but anon, women read and they’re all retarded

>>24844235
>The darkness of the dying world is being compared to the dimming vision of a dying person.
Well, no fucking shit. Go back and read what the thread idiot claimed McCarthy ACKSHUALLY meant by glaucoma, and you might dance yourself into the real context of the conversation.

>>24844090
>>24844229
>noooo it's bad because my redditor sensibilities said so
Kill yourself, redditor.
>>24844235
He is retarded. Even if he is trying to troll, his retardation is making a mess of it. He doesn't understand figurative language period.

>>24840754 (OP)
If transphobia got normalized and accepted by libs, Reddit, etc., tomorrow, you guys would all start sucking tranny dicks out of spite. That’s how much of an NPC you faggots all are. 4chan is simply the biggest NPC hive on the internet.

>>24844279
>>24844279
>>24844279
(You)>>24844275

Glaucoma isn't a fatal illness, so it's not being compared to the vision of a "dying person." And it's not a spiritual illness either. You halfwits are cult members and reading things in where they don't belong, like every other fanboy who ever lived, and then evade with ad-hom when you're called out for doing it. Every McCarthy dicksucker does this same thing. He's like the only author you've ever read, and because his one theme mirrors the abuse you suffered in childhood, you think he's special. He's not. He's overrated and so is the value you place on your own analysis. You infest this board like you infest not a King rallies, and you're the main culprit in driving genuinely intelligent people away from having an interest in literature.

>>24844275
>McCarthy ACKSHUALLY meant by glaucoma
What do you think “dark beyond darkness” is referring to? Are an ESL that thinks a writer can’t use “dark” to describe both literal darkness and the dark nature of the dying world? Is that really dancing in circles, or are you just a mental midget struggling to circle a cul-de-sac?

You’re the kind of retard that hears someone say ‘it’s chilly outside’ and brings out a bowl

>>24844308
>redditor can't help but froth at the mouth and reply like a retard
Lol. Keep seething. Literature requires braincells which you don't have. Don't speak for intelligent people when you're the exact opposite of it. You're so retarded the use of glaucoma as a metaphor there still doesn't make sense to your retarded ass LOL. This whole thread is just one retarded person being massively in denial that he is too retarded to read and understand good literature.

>>24844337
He is an ESL. It is quite obvious.
>>24844295
The redditor in the thread also sucks them, so you don't even have to project.

>>24844275
>McCarthy ACKSHUALLY meant by glaucoma
What do you think “dark beyond darkness” is referring to? Are you an ESL that thinks a writer can’t use “dark” to describe both literal darkness and the dark nature of the dying world? Is that really dancing in circles, or are you just a mental midget struggling to circle a cul-de-sac?

You’re the kind of retard that hears someone say ‘it’s chilly outside’ and brings out a bowl

I love how even now Blood Meridian still sparks truculence among readers.

>>24844346
>The redditor in the thread also sucks them
Yes and you would do it even harder if he wasn't you illiterate dumb nigger

>>24844308
>Glaucoma isn't a fatal illness, so it's not being compared to the vision of a "dying person."
No one called it a fatal illness. It is explicitly a disease only the elderly get (or very abnormal/dying young people) that gradually dims their vision until they reliably die blind.

I wonder if you’re even capable of parsing McCarthy, if you’re struggling with such on-the-nose metaphorical language. This is Dr. Seuss shit, and there’s plenty to criticize McCarthy about without lampshading as a retard.

>>24844365
>trying to nta
Go suck a bag of dicks.

>>24840754 (OP)
>run on sentences
why does no one know what constitutes a run on sentence? just because you think a (properly conjoined) sentence is too long doesn't mean it's grammatically incorrect

>>24844339
He obviously understands it, he's saying it's not a good one and he has a point desu

>>24844295
This is coming from a low IQ brainlet who can't even parse metaphors btw.

>>24844385
>>24844397
>t. NPCs of /lit/ feeling called out

>>24844387
When it works it works but when it doesn't it's almost fatal. McCarthy has a lot of other bad habits too like sometimes making associations that border on non-sequitur. I tend to agree with the one guy in the thread that is calling out fanboys who think CM can do no wrong. He's far from perfect.

>>24844387
I miss when people had things to say about McCarthy.

All these threads are just:
1. Muh violence
2. Muh punctuation
3. Muh pessimism
4. Muh Faulkner

It’s funny to see the outright ESLs who inadvertently reveal their hatred stems from not hating McCarthy, but not understanding figurative language in general. Which even bars them from YA books.

>>24844391
Don't samefag, retarded redditor. You have no idea what glaucoma means there. You think glaucoma as a metaphor must only refer to a person. When the word is literally the ancient greek word for "grey". If you had any functioning braincells, you'd be able to put 2 and 2 together

>>24844403
>literal redditor from r/iamverysmart trying to call out anyone
>>24844407
You're that guy. You're just retarded. Sometimes it doesn't work, but you retards are jiding your retardation behind this fact against things that work perfectly fine. That's why everyone is laughing at you.

>>24844410
So what you're saying is it's dark, and grey, and dark, and glaucomic, and cold.

>>24844419
No, i am saying you're retarded. Look up what a person afflicted with glaucoma perceives before his eyesight goes for good and try to skim the wiki and realize that this is a post-apocalyptic novel about how the known world is crumbling away.

>>24844428
Right, the world is fading away and greyer than grey like someone's vision who is suffering from glaucoma, which also means grey. I didn't see the sheer brilliant (or maybe I should say grey) depth of it before but now I do, so thanks.

>>24844407
>doesn't it's almost fatal
This is true. As much as I like McCarthy, I don’t think anyone could get away with how he sometimes goes overboard with his language.
Even his imitators know to steer clear from the “legion of horribles” type of prose, it’s just gratuitous coming from anyone else. McCarthy himself only gets away with it because he’s established it as his style, and even then I think most would judge some of his passages harshly in isolation.
BM is a really tedious book in general, every paragraph crammed with detail that ultimately means nothing, like the judge and the idiot being so “charged with meaning that their forms were dimmed.” McCarthy is fascinating but his books aren’t for everyone and he definitely isn’t the pinnacle of writing that a lot of his fanboys insist he is

>>24844419
When someone says "it is dark outside", do you run up to them and obnoxiously try to debate that it can't be truly dark because you can still make out shapes in it, hence his use of the term is wrong. Do you understand colloquialisms are a thing, or is it still a few chapters away in you ESL language class? You think when he said "dark beyond darkness", he meant some darkness that was darker than absolute, ultimate, final, total darkness? You have the energy of a retarded little brother who keeps whining as if he knows what he is talking about.

>>24844449
>he definitely isn’t the pinnacle of writing that a lot of his fanboys insist he is
That's because you're just a midwit. A true connoisseur would recognize his ability to get away with what others can't write and still have their writing called 'lapidary'.

>>24844457
The point is that lazy colloquialisms like "darker than dark" shouldn't be called genius writing. Any fair assessment of someone must honestly include the times they were bad, lazy, or inept, and this is one of those times.

>>24844444
Wrong, you should have said you were blinded with gray and your vision was too gray to see things for what they are.
Even when you’re trying to be smug, you’re just revealing you still don’t understand the metaphor. Fucking hilarious

>>24844444
>dumbass still doesn't get it
The use of Glaucoma there isn't for equating it to some retard's estimation of someone's vision. Think what a person afflicted with glaucoma would see the world as

>>24844472
He’s no Henry James.

>>24844483
Grey?

>>24844475
No one called that genius writing. The book is 100k words long, not every phrase is going to be a display of genius. You and your kin were the ones who started autistically screeching about that passage while not even having enough intelligence to understand it lol. Imagine how your kind will fare for the rest of the book? Why then should we hear your """"criticisms""""?

If you weren't so autistically retarded, you'd notice that it is the sound and the rhythm there that are doing the heavy lifting for the more pedestrian metaphors. In other places, the script is flipped.

>>24844485
You better not read Henry James if high falutin language with non-sequiturish metaphors are your problems with McCarthy. Thank God James isn't more popular here, or the r/iamverysmart retard would be doing this full time.

>>24844500
That's not true, the English teacher did.>>24843327

>>24844505
>high flatulence
So McCarthy smells bad too. Must be all those beans he eats under the ruin of a crumbling favela or whateva.
Also he’s no Henry James.

>>24844518
>redditor thinks high falutin means flatulence
It's not even funny at this point. Do you want me to post the bad James? You'd have a stroke trying to mental-gymnast your way into maintaining a consistent agenda for the thread.

>>24844530
>everyone coming at me must be the same guy and they're all retarded redditors
Meds

>>24844513
Hemingway is considered a master while keeping figurative language to a minimum in his works. There's art to it. I didn't go there because you're already struggling with the basics here

>>24844535
You're retarded for sure though.

>>24844530
>You'd have a stroke trying to mental-gymnast
Strokes are for swimmers, not mental gymnasts. Weird analogy there, you shouldn’t pretend to be McCarthy. Not sure why you’re obsessed with an author that deliberately makes the MC his self-insert.

Also he’s no Henry James

>>24844537
No one gives a fuck about your opinion, and they never will. Get a job.

>>24844541
>genuinely had a stroke
Kek

>>24844546
Again, swimming has nothing to do with this thread. The corncob Faulkner-ape does not bring his best to defend him.

>>24844545
>opinion
Only your kind had opinions itt (really bad ones). I only presented the facts.

>>24844550
Go see a doctor, or an asylum

>>24844551
The only thing you present is your ass to the clerk at the unemployment office while the government is on strike. Get a job you pedantic fuck.

>>24844552
I really don’t have time to visit you. Tell Harrogate I said hi though

>>24844555
>series of massively cringe comebacks
Concession accepted

>>24844561
Narrating your own version of events because you were too inept to make it self-evident is submissive behavior.

And nonsensical in this case, bad you’ve just accepted a concession that you’re in an asylum.

>>24844568
>still having a stroke

>>24844449
even with how gratuitious and overwritten his prose often is, mccarthy's acclaim goes beyond just being stylistically established, though? i don't have much of a mind's eye, and he's one of the only writers whose imagery can really transport me into a scene. his work is so alive. those standout passages feel like written magic and make slogging through the tedious bits worth it.

>>24844574
You’ve already stopped defending McCarthy. You’re just a broken record now. I’m glad this exchange was enough to break your mind.

You should read Henry James.

>>24844577
>i don't have much of a mind's eye, and he's one of the only writers whose imagery can really transport me into a scene. his work is so alive. those standout passages feel like written magic and make slogging through the tedious bits worth it.
You love him so much because you have so little imagination
the only people who think mccarthy is some kind of uber genius are 15-32 year old /lit/cel pseuds who have never read anything of substance and read mccarthy and think its the most profound people ever. uniornically reading mccarthy because it LE REMINDS THEM OF DARK SOULS or whatever slop theyre into

Where does The Road stand within his oeuvre?

Friendly reminder that mccarthy wasn't even a real southerner
he was a pampered yankee nepo baby
>yankee born, irish catholic by blood
>wealthy lawyers son, grew up in a large house and went to an upstanding high school
>degree in liberal arts at a good college
>urbanite who never experienced violence in his life
>proto woke (see suttree)
>chose to larp as a poor southern hillbilly

>>24844588
>15-32 year old
This is such a large age range that it really signifies nothing, other than you think only people older than 32 are smart. Which is an oddly specific age to stop at, are you 33?

>>24844588
Rude and uncalled for

>>24844590
Unironically either top or second best because he cut out 85% of the non-sequitur "figurative language" he usually drenched the rest of his books with.

>>24844417
>WAAAAAA WAAAA NOOO YOU ARE THE REDDITOR YOU ARE YOU ARE!!
I accept your concession

>>24844596
There's nothing wrong with any of those ages.
Those ages, however, are the ages mccarthyfags tend to be in. Slighter higher IQ than average, larp as intellectuals, think mccarthy is some kind of obscure literary author and not some guy who went on oprah winfrey

>>24844588
i don't think mccarthy is an uber genius by any means kek, and i'm not a fanboy or ill-read retarded /lit/fag. he's not even in my top 5. but his work impresses me due to the really visceral, visual quality of his figurative language, particularly when the metaphors used would feel obfuscated from most other writers.

Man this guy is really mad that people like mcCarthy novels

>>24840754 (OP)
>>24841208
>>24841302
>>24841344
>>24841346
>>24841349
>>24841370
Maybe he's just not your cup of tea

>>24844602
That's what I was wondering, because I only read The Road and never saw any of that "stylish" stuff. It's just very tight, simple prose. I enjoyed the book.

>>24844591
Its not news or surprising that southern Americans continue to not produce anything of intellectual or literally value.

>>24844608
>>24844588
Crying redditor

4chan is the perfect place for you, a contrarian hack

>>24844602
lmao you suck