Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.92 AVERAGE
3.92 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
emotional
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
The writing style was a bit difficult to for me to get into. I did enjoy it for the most part but I do feel like I was too dumb to understand everything going on. I’m sure there were things that went over my head. Definitely thought provoking.
inspiring
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Had me crying at work
There were some good things about this book, and some bad; hence the three star rating.
The main point in its favour was the actual story. When you get down to it, and ignore the faults of the book (more on those in a moment), this is a touching story about the end of humanity and the love a father has for his son. I liked the sheer despair that came through at times, the desolate landscapes described (when relevant and understandable), the loneliness, the fatigue and sickness and terror, and the father and son travelling onwards, towards an unknown destination - going on only because they had no other choice.
A point was taken off the rating for the grammar. I hated seeing dialogue without speech marks, along with the numerous missing apostrophes and commas. I can't even quote from the book without my browser autocorrecting it!
A few examples, just as a taster:
Using "didn't" without the apostrophe yet "we're" with the apostrophe (because of course, without the apostrophe in "we're" it becomes "were" and means something different). The same goes for couldn't and wouldn't.
His straw hat. What about it?
In the morning they went on. Desolate country. A boar-hide nailed to a barn door. Ratty. Wisp of a tail. What desolate country? What boar-hide? Why is it relevant? Is the boar-hide ratty or is something else?
On this road there are no godspoke men. They are gone and I am left and they have taken with them the world. Query: How does the never to be differ from what never was? Can anyone tell me what the hell this paragraph means? This comes after most of the book appears to be in a third person perspective. The sudden jump to first person would usually indicate thought, but there is no difference in the style of the text to indicate this at all, so it's just a badly worded paragraph that means very little!
Dark of the invisible moon. The nights now only slightly less black. By day the banished sun circles the earth like a grieving mother with a lamp. And this one! Am I the only one who skipped ahead past the strange descriptive paragraphs like this one? There's a huge one at the end which I mostly skimmed. All through the book I skipped past the odd descriptive passages like this that didn't really add much to the story - they're mostly there to be poetic. Of course, as I mentioned before, some of it does add to the story, to the despair and the "stripped down" feeling you get just from reading this book (which I'm sure the grammar or lack of it was meant to add to so the author could be clever).
The other point came off for the things like:
* having what appeared to be a forest fire in the middle of a snowy winter (wet ground does not catch fire unless there is fuel causing the dampness)
* walking past houses with boats outside yet being miles from the sea or the river
* not freezing to death in the snow
* the earthquakes (they seem to be quite far inland when they happen and if they are in the States then would an earthquake be possible that far inland?)
* how the ash is still falling (when it seems to be several years since "the end")
* where is the ash from anyway? (is it a volcanic eruption that has caused this, because that would explain the never-ending ash cloud?)
* how buildings and landscapes can be ruined yet they can walk inside a house an plunder it for goods without the building falling down
* how ash can get inside the buildings in the first place if the doors and windows are shut and if it is a volcanic eruption that caused the ash cloud, how come the whole world isn't like Pompeii?
I could go on. I know some of this can be explained away. But they were all things that bothered me when I read them, that made me question the story. And when I read a book I don't want to be left with tons of questions at the end.
I do understand that despite these points (which I viewed as being negative), a lot of reviews see them as adding to the overall story. I know that the grammar was done in such a way as to give the book a stripped down feeling, to give us a better feeling of how bleak and grey the world was. The same went for the lack of verbs and the use of simple prose - it was all done to emphasise how bleak the characters lives were. And I know that the vagueness was perhaps deliberate, so it could be more relatable, it could be any of us in that situation.
And I did like the part with the old man, which I saw as a kind of explanation of why the author chooses not to name anyone in the book (because names are not needed):
Is your name really Ely?
No
You don't want to say your name.
I don't want to say it.
Why?
I couldn't trust you with it. To do something with it. I don't want anybody talking about me. To say where I was or what I said when I was there. I mean, you could talk about me maybe. But nobody could say that it was me. I could be anybody. I think in times like these the less said the better. If something had happened and we were survivors and we met on the road then we'd have something to talk about. But we're not. So we don't.
This isn't a completely accurate quotation as my browser inserted the apostrophes that were missing, but you get the point.
All in all, I did enjoy the book to a certain extent, once I'd got past the first 30 pages or so and realised that the lack of grammar was there to stay and I would have to just put up with it. I don't think I'd read it again unless I absolutely had to, and this book has in no way made me want to read any more from Cormac McCarthy. I don't think I'd recommend it to anyone else, either.
The main point in its favour was the actual story. When you get down to it, and ignore the faults of the book (more on those in a moment), this is a touching story about the end of humanity and the love a father has for his son. I liked the sheer despair that came through at times, the desolate landscapes described (when relevant and understandable), the loneliness, the fatigue and sickness and terror, and the father and son travelling onwards, towards an unknown destination - going on only because they had no other choice.
A point was taken off the rating for the grammar. I hated seeing dialogue without speech marks, along with the numerous missing apostrophes and commas. I can't even quote from the book without my browser autocorrecting it!
A few examples, just as a taster:
Using "didn't" without the apostrophe yet "we're" with the apostrophe (because of course, without the apostrophe in "we're" it becomes "were" and means something different). The same goes for couldn't and wouldn't.
His straw hat. What about it?
In the morning they went on. Desolate country. A boar-hide nailed to a barn door. Ratty. Wisp of a tail. What desolate country? What boar-hide? Why is it relevant? Is the boar-hide ratty or is something else?
On this road there are no godspoke men. They are gone and I am left and they have taken with them the world. Query: How does the never to be differ from what never was? Can anyone tell me what the hell this paragraph means? This comes after most of the book appears to be in a third person perspective. The sudden jump to first person would usually indicate thought, but there is no difference in the style of the text to indicate this at all, so it's just a badly worded paragraph that means very little!
Dark of the invisible moon. The nights now only slightly less black. By day the banished sun circles the earth like a grieving mother with a lamp. And this one! Am I the only one who skipped ahead past the strange descriptive paragraphs like this one? There's a huge one at the end which I mostly skimmed. All through the book I skipped past the odd descriptive passages like this that didn't really add much to the story - they're mostly there to be poetic. Of course, as I mentioned before, some of it does add to the story, to the despair and the "stripped down" feeling you get just from reading this book (which I'm sure the grammar or lack of it was meant to add to so the author could be clever).
The other point came off for the things like:
* having what appeared to be a forest fire in the middle of a snowy winter (wet ground does not catch fire unless there is fuel causing the dampness)
* walking past houses with boats outside yet being miles from the sea or the river
* not freezing to death in the snow
* the earthquakes (they seem to be quite far inland when they happen and if they are in the States then would an earthquake be possible that far inland?)
* how the ash is still falling (when it seems to be several years since "the end")
* where is the ash from anyway? (is it a volcanic eruption that has caused this, because that would explain the never-ending ash cloud?)
* how buildings and landscapes can be ruined yet they can walk inside a house an plunder it for goods without the building falling down
* how ash can get inside the buildings in the first place if the doors and windows are shut and if it is a volcanic eruption that caused the ash cloud, how come the whole world isn't like Pompeii?
I could go on. I know some of this can be explained away. But they were all things that bothered me when I read them, that made me question the story. And when I read a book I don't want to be left with tons of questions at the end.
I do understand that despite these points (which I viewed as being negative), a lot of reviews see them as adding to the overall story. I know that the grammar was done in such a way as to give the book a stripped down feeling, to give us a better feeling of how bleak and grey the world was. The same went for the lack of verbs and the use of simple prose - it was all done to emphasise how bleak the characters lives were. And I know that the vagueness was perhaps deliberate, so it could be more relatable, it could be any of us in that situation.
And I did like the part with the old man, which I saw as a kind of explanation of why the author chooses not to name anyone in the book (because names are not needed):
Is your name really Ely?
No
You don't want to say your name.
I don't want to say it.
Why?
I couldn't trust you with it. To do something with it. I don't want anybody talking about me. To say where I was or what I said when I was there. I mean, you could talk about me maybe. But nobody could say that it was me. I could be anybody. I think in times like these the less said the better. If something had happened and we were survivors and we met on the road then we'd have something to talk about. But we're not. So we don't.
This isn't a completely accurate quotation as my browser inserted the apostrophes that were missing, but you get the point.
All in all, I did enjoy the book to a certain extent, once I'd got past the first 30 pages or so and realised that the lack of grammar was there to stay and I would have to just put up with it. I don't think I'd read it again unless I absolutely had to, and this book has in no way made me want to read any more from Cormac McCarthy. I don't think I'd recommend it to anyone else, either.
dark
emotional
sad
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This was a great story for what it was. But I really wanted so much more! I know it was supposed to be about the relationship, but I still found myself asking, "where's the rest?"
dark
reflective
sad
medium-paced
i did cry quite a lot at the end and a little in the middle too.