Scan barcode
mourn_area's review against another edition
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
* * * * * * 6.5/10 * * * * * *
yaredz's review against another edition
1.0
Let me preface this by saying that I rarely give bad ratings, and am even less inclined to write reviews about books I didn't enjoy. I've been quite busy lately, and haven't even reviewed Jane Eyre, though I loved it so much. However, my opinion on The Road is a very controversial one, so I feel as if I am obliged to explain my rating.
In my opinion, McCarthy's prose is borderline unreadable. Yes, I can grant that its sparsity may be a product of stylistic design. This is a barren, post-apocalyptic world utterly devoid of hope, and his writing aims to reflect that. Typically, when my judgment is at odds with artistic intent, I am more than willing to concede the benefit of the doubt. I won't even elaborate on the non-existent plot, the lack of punctuation, the stagnant, nameless characterization (if you can call it that), and the repetitive, awkward dialogue that pervades every page of the novel. At the same time, if one were to argue that all of these literary decisions are necessary to preserve the child's seeming innocence, and emphasize the father's internal struggle and aversion to vulnerability, I could see where they were coming from; not that it makes the reading experience any better, but I could perhaps see some semblance of reason behind it. But above all, I am so appalled by the egregiously bad writing that I cannot begin to fathom an excuse for it.
The following passage recounts the man's first night in the novel:
This, to me, is about as literarily coherent as a population census, and as devoid of meaning as an unusually shaped rock. Redundantly repeating a term like "carried forth" in the span of four words, and aimlessly listing natural events does not, in my book, pass as world-building, yet this is the inescapably dull prose that runs rampant throughout the novel. Is McCarthy trying to make a point about the man's perception of the barren wasteland he lives in? Probably. Did he have to do it through relentless monotony, in a form reminiscent of a glorified grocery list? I doubt it.
Take, for instance, this passage from Solzhenitsyn's One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich:
Both characters are in relatively similar bleak, tedious situations: McCarthy's man , for lack of a better word, suffers the wasteland aftermath of an apocalypse, whereas Solzhenitsyn's Shukov has suffered almost a decade of hard labour in a gulag , convicted for a crime he did not commit. Their suffering is clearly derived from the poverty and extraordinary banality of a continued, purposeless existence. Stylistically, one can discern parallels between the third-person, present-tense, destitute language in both passages, yet the latter text presents the monotony of Shukov's life in far more visceral, compelling language that shames McCarthy's disjunctive prose, in which nine sentences fail to communicate even a single coherent thought.
Look, if the aim is mundanity (and for the aforementioned reasons above, it might very well be), McCarthy definitely achieves it - the bigger issue is that monotony without respite elicits nothing but unfathomable boredom. Where a better author such as Solzhenitsyn introduces this relief through the subtle variation in style in another inmate's lunchtime story, or a masterfully depicted image of Ivan sucking the marrow out of fish bones, the contrast we get in The Road is in the occasional discordant phrase, jarring in its irrelevance to and incongruity with the novel's otherwise vapid staccato sentences. The quote below exemplifies this issue perfectly:
Where did that last drawling, verbose, simile come from? Nowhere that I can tell; it appears pretentiously out of the blue, harbouring neither rhyme nor reason. It simply is, and we, the readers, are to accept its grating dissonance as if it were merely another flawless manifestation of McCarthy's masterful prose.
I think I've gone on for long enough, so I'll refrain from any more criticism. 1/5.
In my opinion, McCarthy's prose is borderline unreadable. Yes, I can grant that its sparsity may be a product of stylistic design. This is a barren, post-apocalyptic world utterly devoid of hope, and his writing aims to reflect that. Typically, when my judgment is at odds with artistic intent, I am more than willing to concede the benefit of the doubt. I won't even elaborate on the non-existent plot, the lack of punctuation, the stagnant, nameless characterization (if you can call it that), and the repetitive, awkward dialogue that pervades every page of the novel. At the same time, if one were to argue that all of these literary decisions are necessary to preserve the child's seeming innocence, and emphasize the father's internal struggle and aversion to vulnerability, I could see where they were coming from; not that it makes the reading experience any better, but I could perhaps see some semblance of reason behind it. But above all, I am so appalled by the egregiously bad writing that I cannot begin to fathom an excuse for it.
The following passage recounts the man's first night in the novel:
"He lay listening to the water drip in the woods. Bedrock, this. The cold and the silence. The ashes of the late world carried on the bleak and temporal winds to and fro in the void. Carried forth and scattered and carried forth again. Everything uncoupled from its shoring. Unsupported in the ashen air. Sustained by a breath, trembling and brief. If only my heart were stone."
This, to me, is about as literarily coherent as a population census, and as devoid of meaning as an unusually shaped rock. Redundantly repeating a term like "carried forth" in the span of four words, and aimlessly listing natural events does not, in my book, pass as world-building, yet this is the inescapably dull prose that runs rampant throughout the novel. Is McCarthy trying to make a point about the man's perception of the barren wasteland he lives in? Probably. Did he have to do it through relentless monotony, in a form reminiscent of a glorified grocery list? I doubt it.
Take, for instance, this passage from Solzhenitsyn's One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich:
"He must make his bed now - there wasn't much to it. Strip his mattress of the grubby blanket and lie on it (it must have been '41 when he last slept in sheets - that was at home; it even seemed odd for women to bother about sheets, all that extra laundering). Head on the pillow, stuffed with shavings of wood: feet in jacket sleeve; coat on top of blanket and - Glory be to Thee, O Lord. Another day over."
Both characters are in relatively similar bleak, tedious situations: McCarthy's man , for lack of a better word, suffers the wasteland aftermath of an apocalypse, whereas Solzhenitsyn's Shukov has suffered almost a decade of hard labour in a gulag , convicted for a crime he did not commit. Their suffering is clearly derived from the poverty and extraordinary banality of a continued, purposeless existence. Stylistically, one can discern parallels between the third-person, present-tense, destitute language in both passages, yet the latter text presents the monotony of Shukov's life in far more visceral, compelling language that shames McCarthy's disjunctive prose, in which nine sentences fail to communicate even a single coherent thought.
Look, if the aim is mundanity (and for the aforementioned reasons above, it might very well be), McCarthy definitely achieves it - the bigger issue is that monotony without respite elicits nothing but unfathomable boredom. Where a better author such as Solzhenitsyn introduces this relief through the subtle variation in style in another inmate's lunchtime story, or a masterfully depicted image of Ivan sucking the marrow out of fish bones, the contrast we get in The Road is in the occasional discordant phrase, jarring in its irrelevance to and incongruity with the novel's otherwise vapid staccato sentences. The quote below exemplifies this issue perfectly:
"Eyes closed, arms oaring. Upright to what? Something nameless in the night, lode or matrix. To which he and the stars were common satellite. Like the great pendulum in its rotunda scribing through the long day movements of the universe of which you may say it knows nothing and yet know it must."
Where did that last drawling, verbose, simile come from? Nowhere that I can tell; it appears pretentiously out of the blue, harbouring neither rhyme nor reason. It simply is, and we, the readers, are to accept its grating dissonance as if it were merely another flawless manifestation of McCarthy's masterful prose.
I think I've gone on for long enough, so I'll refrain from any more criticism. 1/5.
mssweeney's review against another edition
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
hotdamnitsanna's review against another edition
4.0
I literally could not stop picturing the boy as the most adorable and innocent thing ever which made this so impossibly hard to stomach
davefilkins's review against another edition
5.0
I called my Dad right After I finished The Road - just to let him know I love him.
The Road is an incredible story about the bonds of love between a father and son set upon the canvas of a mysterious post-apocalyptic world seemingly in the not too distant future. Easily one of the best "modern" novels I have read.
The Road is an incredible story about the bonds of love between a father and son set upon the canvas of a mysterious post-apocalyptic world seemingly in the not too distant future. Easily one of the best "modern" novels I have read.
migomago's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
book_busy's review against another edition
2.0
I entered this book with semi high expectations and was not exactly disappointed as I gathered from a sample of this novel that it wasn't to be the most dynamic story. However, each new event just felt lacklustre and all in all I don't feel like the plot accomplished much. The characters also could've cut down on the odd god talk. I don't really feel this is a bad novel, it's more just somewhat forgettable and the clunky dialogue I found unrealistic and irritating to read. Also -1 point for the unnecessary use of the r- slur by the young boy towards the story's end. Still, McCarthy writes well enough that this still felt like a relatively sturdy novel.
annaa_aaaaa's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Self harm, Slavery, Suicide, Trafficking, Body horror, Gore, Grief, Abandonment, Animal death, Blood, Death, Death of parent, Gun violence, Physical abuse, Cannibalism, Child death, and Pregnancy
lilo3756's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
jesss_o's review against another edition
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.0