I’ve been reading Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy. I’m 30% through the novel, and I got to the part where the magicians are doing tricks for the Judge. I’ve started this book twice, and both times I’ve stopped around 25-30% through. One of the major themes in the book is violence. The main character is born under a bad omen. From adolescence the Kid is moved from one violent set piece to the next. It’s sorta what moves the plot forward.
There are particular scenes where dead babies are hanging from trees, and a ragtag bunch of wannabe cowboys are scalped to death by Native Americans. There’s usage of the N word, which I understand is accurate for the time period. It still makes me feel a certain way. I have to put the book down because it’s just too much. It puts me in a bad headspace.
I’ve read the Road, another McCarthy book and loved it. There’s something about this one that I just can’t do.Those who have finished Blood Meridian, how did it make you feel? Are there many others who had to just put it down? I’d love to see what others think.
by AdGold1263
27 Comments
I loved it, but you’re not wrong that it is brutal, and you can’t be wrong about how it makes you feel. I’m white, so the n word may not affect me the same. Everyone in that book, except for the victims, is completely out of control.
I really just want to know about the ending, which is a matter of debate (I hope that is not a spoiler, I don’t think it is)
Probably not the book for you bc it ends in an even more brutal way, at least it’s implied that something horrific happens
It’s my favourite book of all time. I like bleakness grotesque horror of it all set against an almost alien backdrop that makes sense to me having spent time in it. Prose is great too but if you don’t like the first 30% its not like something miraculous happens to make it worthwhile for you
Yes, it is the most brutal book I have ever read. Totally understandable if you dont want to continue, the tree with dead babies is one of those parts that you dont forget. There are many passages in it which I still think about. But, it is also one of the best books I have ever read. The fact that it put in that headspace is a pretty unique thing about it. Few books have left such a lasting impact on me.
It’s my favorite book ever, but I can certainly see why people wouldn’t enjoy it. It’s brutal, but I also find it to be one of the most beautifully written books I’ve ever read. By the end of the book I was almost numb to the violence. I think that is by design.
That is definitely a tough one. I feel CM writes about people no longer constrained by rule or law. That if people suddenly were free to act without consequences or fear of punishment, absolute brutality would result. Making the character of the judge even more insane. The boy we follow through the madness seems to somehow distance himself from the escalating depravity around him and, for lack of any other redeeming character, you begin to hope he survives the ordeal. Only the judge sees him as he is. There are consequences after all.
It’s not a feel good book. Yet it’s another beautifully written novel. My personal take away is even though the hopelessness and brutality is soul crushing in the book and It is an unflinching portrayal of the worst we are capable of. It leaves me looking at the personal world I live in with hope. WE are not that. WE are better than that. I’ve never had the same feeling after finishing any other book.
It’s one of the most important and evergreen relevant American novels beyond the Moby Dick, indescribing the underlying motivations of our economic system and culture, especially in this context are gun lust and unrepentant amoral selfishness coupled with or penchant for chaos and a complete lack of empathy. Although Moby Dick captured our economic rage and lust for oil in a still relevant way, this definitely beautifully explains our nihilism and are complete apathy to death and violence.
I mean it is incredibly dark and bleak, but I never felt overwhelmed by it. The prose is absolutely immaculate and the character of the Judge alone makes the book worth persevering with. It doesn’t get any lighter from where you stopped if that’s what you’re wondering, it descends even further. I suppose for some it might be too much, but I really enjoyed it
It’s awesome. I tried his books because someone told me (I am not a native speaker) that McArthy has his special way with words but I stayed because I simply loved it. The way McArthy writes his stories is something I find lacking in modern literature and other kinds of art. It’s like eating a large properly spiced medium rare steak after the whole year of salad diet lol. It just feels incredible.
The central question of Blood Meridian is given in this line from the first few pages:
>His origins are become remote as is his destiny and not again in all the world’s turnings will there be terrains so wild and barbarous to try whether the stuff of creation may be shaped to man’s will or whether his own heart is not another kind of clay.
The book is wondering about which force is stronger: man’s willingness to shape the world how he wants it, or the world’s ability to grind him down. The setting on the border around 1850 is a “terrain so wild and barbarous” as to really draw out this question. In other words, all the violence and deprivations the kid is put through have to be truly savage in order to look the question as head-on as possible. Is this unceasing barrage of difficulty going to bend him towards being someone like Glanton, Toadvine, or any of the other characters who are introduced and disposed of just as quickly and casually as they dispose of others — basically victims of circumstance? Or is he going to be someone like the Judge, whose intelligence and strength is at such a supernatural level that he seems able to make things happen in the world, rather than just being a passive victim to it? And even if he could become that — would he actually want to be someone like the Judge? For those of us who think men can shape the world to our will, and “manifest” our own “destiny,” how comfortable are we with the idea that in doing so, we might become like this character?
If you’re not interested in this central theme, or not picking up on it, then the book is going to seem like a tiresome onslaught of one brutal scene after another. But none of the violence in this book is pointless. It all revolves around that central philosophical question. So maybe you will find your interest in it renewed once you start looking at it in this way.
Beyond what the book means and what it’s trying to say, obviously the language is just on another level. This and Suttree are his two highest achievements as far as prose, and nobody else writes at this caliber in this particular style.
It took me three tries to get through it; McCarthy makes some weird, but very effective choices throughout the work— horrific things are described next to and nearly the same way as mundane things. Ultimately, if it’s making you feel bad, come back to it later and see if you feel the same way. It’s a challenging work, but I think ultimately a rewarding one.
damn, everything you’re saying just makes me want to read the book more now
I loved it. It’s supposed to make you feel that way I think. One of my favorite bands Lucero has an album based on the book.
I finished Hurricane Season by Fernanda Melchor recently and it reminded me of Blood Meridian with its relentless narrative pace.
I found Blood Meridian almost hypnotic to read.
I find it’s very important to know what the west was like. What the U.S. was founded and built on. Our dance with the devil if you will. Especially considering how romanticized the west can be in pop culture.
Totally understandable that it’s not for everyone but my god what a beautifully written book. One of the best in the English language IMO.
It truly is a masterpiece of literature.
Cormac Mccarthy isn’t for the faint of heart, that’s for sure. I grew up rough, went to war, and have spent the majority of my life in combat sports. Violence is a part of human nature as I see it and it’s not something I shy from as there is always more than one side to violence (good guys, victims, circumstance, etc.) Not necessarily to be glorified, and hopefully to be transcended as a species, but to be recognized as something that is in our nature and definitely in our past.
There are some characters I will never forget in that book – the Judge primarily. It has been a while but I do remember him speaking about violence in a way that was so matter of fact and really hit home with me. It was like the top post alludes to: either the world moves around you, or you bend to the will of the world. It’s a choice, really. You can accumulate tools and violence to help with the choice, or you can be meek and a slave to it all.
There is an element of genius in the extremity of the violence. But really, the intersection of that harsh reality with the precision of the writing and the beautifully written philosophical moments scattered throughout highlight for me what truly makes this book rise to the occasion. To me, it is a testament to what you can make beautiful in this world.
I abhor violence. Yet this is one of my favourite books. I quote it a lot.
It’s the only book i have re-read. I have a friend who reads a ton. He reads everything. Loves McCarthy. He can’t finish Blood Meridian for the same reason you are struggling. There is no shame in putting it down. Maybe this is not the time for you. Maybe later you will get through it. Maybe it’s just a book you never need to read.
Personally the violence drew me in. It’s so horrific, especially in contrast to McCarthy’s prose that it just sort of overwhelmed me. I actually have a hard time explaining why i like that part of it. It shows the true brutality of humanity. The absolute lows than humans are capable of, and it’s just something I can’t take my eyes off.
Beyond that, I am a bit obsessed with Judge Holden. I read My Confession because it is supposedly the only reference to the person McCarthy used as inspiration. I just love the judge. Again, as with the violence, I feel like I’m starting into an abyss. The character is evil incarnate. He is this godlike monster that I just want to understand. I want to break him down because he is pure terror and if I could understand him then maybe he wouldn’t be so scary.
The story is horrific and beautiful. I remember a scene where McCarthy describes Apache riding down upon them as “death hilarious” and I just can’t ever forget the image. When i read that book I feel like I am glimpsing something inside myself i didn’t know I was capable of. Something I’m too scared to explore inside myself.
Sorry if this is long and pretentious, I just love that book.
I have read everything written by McCarthy, except for his two new books coming out of course.
I really enjoy Blood Meridian, its the most violent of his novels and thats the point. The book wants you to know that the west was tamed by rapist, murdering scalp hunters. There was no glory in it, and America is not some exceptional land of justice.
Thats my reading of the book anyway, lots od scholarship also points to it, although its hard to find books that have generated as much scholarship as Blood Meridian.
Blood Meridian was the subject of my senior thesis/seminar. It’s about the erasure of the Latin influence on western culture and its replacement by the Germanic.
Everywhere the gang goes they come across ruined missions and Latin culture in decay. The Judge’s philosophy is clearly informed by Nietzsche (who famously said God is Dead, albeit not in the literal sense) and some of the sections are titled in German. At the time the book is set, tons of Germans were moving to Texas, and they’re still one of the most represented communities there.
The 19th century truly marked a turning point in western culture. That century brought us the Scottish Enlightenment with such thinkers as John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, and Adam Smith (Anglo Saxons are of course, Germans), but also more proper “German” writers like Goethe, Hegel, Clausewitz, Marx, and more (Nietzsche would come a bit later). Protestantism also came out of northern Europe. The Protestant Ethic as espoused by Max Weber holds that one should accept their lot in life and perform their job or place in society to the best of their ability, and that wealth is a sign of favor from God as wealth accumulation supposedly allows no time for vice or luxury. Most importantly, Protestantism is the religion of the individual. There is no central church, and you don’t need a priest to achieve salvation. That makes it the religion most compatible with capitalism. Industry was, of course, booming in the German states and England during the 19th century.
Latin cultures, by contrast, are Catholic (like McCarthy). Catholics are required to subordinate themselves to a higher Earthly power independent of the state and markets. Latin cultures are typically thought of as more relaxed and focused less on making money, as opposed to their neighbors to the north (even today Mediterranean industries have trouble competing in the EU and Germany occasionally bails one of them out every few years). Catholics also typically operate hospitals, orphanages, schools, soup kitchens, etc. They are, at a glance, a bit more community oriented. Protestants do the things I’ve listed here, but usually when there is some political gain or good will to be had. There are of course Germans Catholics, but in the southern part of the country (interestingly the place the Communists were able to hold on to for quite some time before WWII).
Democracy and the idea of men being equal as we think of it, comes from the western canon of political thought which is in turn rooted in Greek thought. At the time BM is set, writers like Marx, Hegel, Hobbes, etc were writing somewhat anti-Democratic works. The Judge (and Nietzsche) of course believes the weak are naturally ruled by the strong.
Now, on to war.
The British Empire reached its height in the 19th century largely by pillaging the resources of peoples all over the world (India, China, Africa, etc). What we now know as Germany was where Napoleon, the Romans, and the various German states warred for centuries. At the end of WWI, all of German society was collectively traumatized. Many of their soldiers had seen the worst warfare to ever come along in history and those back home were subject to food shortages, political instability, and of course, the humiliation that followed the Treaty of Versailles. The Nazi party and the Freikorps were made up of a lot of WWI soldiers who had seen the most killing, the most suffering, the most barbarism. Quite like the Glanton Gang, the bloodshed irreversibly warped their minds and focused them on continuing the violence in the form of another war. What followed was….well, we all know what followed. Bloodshed on a never before seen scale, and a genocide that was methodical and efficient- very German in its execution. Hitler epitomized the idea that certain races or people were superior and would naturally subordinate or wipe out their lesser neighbors, quite like the gang does to the Apaches (and eventually anyone they cross paths with, as bloodlust eventually overcomes the philosophical or moral justifications for violence).
McCarthy is saying that Northern European culture is the culture of capitalism, war, exploitation, and domination. It’s no coincidence that Blood Meridian’s alternative title is “the evening redness in the west;” the west being western culture and society. The old world, imperfect as it is, is being subsumed by a new one that is much worse. Man’s base nature is not only unleashed, but rationalized in the forms of imperialism, capitalism, and the notion that some peoples are naturally higher on the food chain and that is decided through war.
I believe McCarthy is using this as a way to portray a Gnostic sense of humanity and the earth in the midst of an eternal becoming. That’s what the bone collectors symbolize at the end- a past erased as part of an ever occurring process that points to reality, people, and culture as constantly in flux and never fixed. It may interest people to know that Jakob Boehme, the thinker quoted at the beginning, was a German and Gnostic mystic whose writings underpin the “mythology” of Blood Meridian, and maybe all of McCarthy’s works if you choose to read that far into it. A lot of people like to say “the point of BM is war is bad and endless” or that the Judge is the devil, neither of which are true. It is much more likely that the Judge is one of the Gnostic archons, if he is to be assigned any identity at all.
John Sepich’s Notes on Blood Meridian is a great place to start for diving beneath the surface of this work. I also recommend Boehme’s Aurora and Six Theosophic Points as supplements.
You ever hear the term “feel-good movie”? Well this is a feel-bad book lol
Anyone do the audiobook for this? Been wanting to read it for ages but when I listened to the demo it seemed to have very flowery and poetic writing that is hard to follow in audio format. I don’t know if anyone tried it and it gets any easier because audiobooks are the only real opportunity I get to read these days.
*Bellum omnium contra omnes*
The brutality and violence you mention is, for the most part, cribbed from memoirs and history books. Most of the characters and events in the book actually happened or at least exist in memoirs. Glanton was a real person and the judge is the antagonist in Chamberlain’s ‘confessions’. This is why I disagree with a lot of readers who argue the book takes place in a different reality than our own.
A major theme is war/violence as the ultimate form of divination. If divination: then fate. This is why the stylistic things you mention exist, The Kid is kind of drawn through life. Even when he has to make choices like whether or not to leave whatshisname alive or kill him when fleeing from attackers, those choices don’t unfold like the kid willing a decision into reality. He just kind of goes through his fate. The passage you are currently on: why did the kid even draw a fucking card? He could decide not to. But he is both drawn to his fate and to back down from it might appear as cowardice or bad luck to a bunch of killers. Bad luck/cowardice just as when he pulls that arrow from dude’s wound Tobin sez “he would have taken you with him” or something like that.
Another theme is civilization vs. savagery, but McCarthy uses the judge to show the cold barbarism of civilization(“exists without my knowledge, exits without my consent”). In this way he doesn’t really exalt one end of the civilization vs. savagery binary over the other and in fact the tone of the “fencing” passage points away from the usual theme of “taming the west” or “fencing of the frontier” being only good. Same goes for Bathcat talking about running out of country. This breaks with the usual trope of civilization vs. savagery themes where civilization brings the light of reason and is only ever good. McCarthy’s text seems to be critical of both poles.
Some argue that the book world is a different world than the one in our past. If true: the world of the book is far less violent than the world we live in. There were like a dozen mass shootings last week, has the war of all against all actually been tamped down? Or did the violence just get shuffled off into different places? Did the violence get hidden? justified? Well that would only happen IF PEOPLE ARE NOT WILLING TO COUNTENANCE IT.
For me The Road is far more brutal. The constant subtext is a father who has to execute his child at any second to prevent the boy from being abducted and made into a catamite. A world in which murder of one’s child is a moral response to the conditions? Thats some brutal shit. But within these worlds is still opportunity for tenderness: The kid pulling the arrow, mercy killing or not mercy killing as they flee, and some(scant) textual evidence that kid, tobin, and toadvine didn’t participate in the slaughter of the peaceful village.
​
Edited to add link to Ch 11 of Foucault’s “Society must be defended”: [http://sites.psu.edu/vicarocas426s16/wp-content/uploads/sites/37602/2016/01/Foucault-Society-must-be-defended14032016.pdf](http://sites.psu.edu/vicarocas426s16/wp-content/uploads/sites/37602/2016/01/Foucault-Society-must-be-defended14032016.pdf)
This is my favorite book of his.
He wrote this by pulling from news articles of the time period. (See the doctoral thesis called Notes on Blood Meridian available for check out at some university libraries.) This is basically historical nonfiction. No one is good in the “good olde days.”
It’s Manifest Destiny meets Native resistance. The beginning of the US and end of our world. What is the meaning of life for some people? To survive and put an end to those who don’t want you to survive. Where is God? What is the devil? Everyone. No one. Everywhere. No where. In ourselves. In others. Outside tempting you or inside tempting our selves.
I think this book is much more an accurate representation of what America really is. It’s not glory and flags and all that garbage. It’s murder and oppression conducted by every group ever to walk these lands.
The vocabulary is often in triplicate. It has a common meaning, a not so common meaning, and an obscure meaning I found in my 1930s dictionary. Each vocab word is accurate in the sentence. I like to imagine McCarthy actually doing this on purpose even if I’m wrong.
I have to admit tho. I skipped all that religious stuff with the guy in the tent preaching .
Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent.
I think for me what kept the book from crossing that line of being purely disturbing is how simultaneously surreal and dreamlike the story is. The things that occur are horrific, but through Mccarthy’s mythic, almost biblical use of imagery and storytelling the overall philosophical thrust of the book is never lost. There is great value in facing the inherent evil of man.