The beginning of this little think piece of mine will cover the ending of the book, as I believe the ending is the glue that binds the rest of the novel together. I’ll then add some general thoughts about plot, pacing, and prose.

The epilogue, consistent with the rest of the book, is metaphor in its most profound form. In my mind, the holes taken from the earth represent the progress of humanity. Humanity as a whole brings hell about the natural land it inhabits and destroys God’s creations indiscriminately, but an infinitesimal number of men lead the charge. Those who are not leading have no choice but to comply. The holes have already been carved, and their contents incinerated; as followers, we have no choice but to watch our step, lest we twist an ankle.

As for the last chapter, I will not pore over the whole thing. Instead, I’ll say that it is clear the judge is supposed to represent God to some degree (literal or otherwise). At the very least, his character is used as an example of how power and knowledge harnessed by capable hands is able to commit atrocities on a biblical scale; and just as the christian god accrues followers, and just as the christian god’s philosophies oft end up causing more harm than good, so too does the judge accrue followers, and so too do his philosophies, grand and astute as they may be, result in harm. Perhaps the judge is an allegory for Manifest Destiny.

I do wonder what significance the imbecile holds. The judge requires a follower of some sort, and so bereft of that, he resorts to the imbecile, perhaps?

As for the rest of the book, I do have a few bones to pick.

I really am not one for this writing style. I see it as a hindrance. It’s bearable, but people liken the prose to Moby Dick (brazenly displayed on the front AND back cover of the book), and frankly, this is an insult to Melville. Yes, the imagery is vivid, the subtext is rich, and the book gets very philosophical at points. But in his prose, McCarthy only holds a candle to Melville when the judge is speaking.

The lack of quotation marks coupled with the run-on sentences were novel and helped set the mood initially, but the more I read, the more these aspects came off as pretentious, needless obstruction.

The book also gets into a rut towards the middle: vivid depictions of nature, a taste of philosophy, an atrocity, a town, an atrocity, rinse and repeat. The book’s complete lack of emotion is harrowing, but also tends to make things blend together, especially in the middle.

All in all, this book definitely has weight, and I have lots to think about.

I’m curious as to what messages you all got from the book as a whole. What meaning did you glean from the tail end of the book? What do you think of the prose?

I can dive into thoughts on characters, specific events, etc. in the comments.