ah, blood meridian, monsieur? that novel is the sark and chaparral of literature, the filament whereon rode the remuda of highbrow, corraled out of some destitute hacienda upon the arroya, quirting and splurting with main and with pyrolatrous coagulate of lobated grandiloquence. our eyes rode over the pages, monsieur, of that slatribed azotea like argonauts of suttee, juzgados of swole, bights and systoles of walleyed and tyrolean and carbolic and tectite and scurvid and querent and creosote and scapular malpais and shellalagh. we scalped, monsieur, the gantlet of its esker and led our naked bodies into the rebozos of its mennonite and siliceous fauna, wallowing in the jasper and the carnelian like archimandrites, teamsters, combers of cassinette scoria, centroids of holothurian chancre, with pizzles of enfiladed indigo panic grass in the saltbush of our vigas, true commodores of the written page, rebuses, monsieur, we were the mygale spiders too and the devonian and debouched pulque that settled on the frizzen studebakers, listening the wolves howling in the desert while we saw the judge rise out of a thicket of corbelled arches, whinstone, cairn, cholla, lemurs, femurs, leantos, moonblanched nacre, uncottered fistulas of groaning osnaburg and kelp, isomers of fluepipe and halms awap of griddle, guisado, pelancillo.
Wendigoon has utterly annihilated any civil discussions around Blood Meridian. This isn't due to newbies either. Frick me, that would've been the best outcome from what Wendigoon has released. What that youtuber with a 5 hour long video covering the most gruesome american literature to date has done, is summon orangutans that only know to communicate and discuss in contrarianism.
I still have no idea what wendiwhoon even said because I never watched the video. I don't believe that a single person could damage the discussion of literature, it is an utterly ridiculous exaggeration.
That’s what I am saying. It literally did nothing but bring a bit of spotlight on one of the most gruesome works of literature of American literacy. There’s few people that would be interested on tuning in a five hour long video that describes fricked up shit. Its mostly contrarians that try to bring down the book because its “normiefied”.
I see. At the very least, it adds some weird performative element to discussions where one pretends scaled (and worse) dying men is not terrible. It's not that violence was new to me in any way, I grew up with rotten dot com and faces of death. But what makes the violence noteworthy is the historicity and relative recency of the setting. If it weren't for that, I probably wouldn't have cared at all. At least there are more things to think about in the book than violence, but some readers cannot move beyond it.
It’s free with audible plus and I’m halfway through and it’s boring, I don’t want to quit halfway through the book because everyone raves about it so it has to get better right but it’s just boring.
I’ll tough it out, it’s free and I listen to it while driving around for work so no loss to me. I just thought I’d like it more. I like westerns like the Virginian and Riders of the Purple Sage and I like gritty western films like Bone Tomahawk so I thought I’d like this book but I don’t know maybe I’m just too smoothbrained for it.
Maybe part of the appeal of this is the “oooooh descriptive blood and gore and violence oooooh” part but my favorite things to read are memoirs of combat vets and those get pretty detailed and gritty so maybe I’m just desensitized to the fictional violence of this novel.
That’s an old-fashioned convention in Western literature that can be found going a while back (the laying out of numerous detailed subheadings summarizing each chapter or section), also sometimes called the “argument” (an older word for an abstract/summary) of a poem or work of literature. Barth also does it in The Sot-Weed Factor as part of the book’s parody of 18th-century literature, for instance. Here it is in Smollett’s Peregrine Pickle. (This is also, I imagine, where Pynchon picks up the convention of starting many chapter titles of V. with “In which…”, since it also shows up frequently in this convention of chapter subheading summaries).
However, the way McCarthy does it is uniquely interesting because there’s a few instances, if I remember right, where he subtly suggests something of theological/symbolic/allusive import through use of rare or archaic word choices in these abstracts which add a little something to the chapter that isn’t explicitly stated in the chapter itself.
Click in this link,if you want a free and a good writing and grammar,and fascinating metaphors and figurative language.
https://altair.pw/pub/lib/Cormac%20Mccarthy%20-%20The%20Blood%20Meridian.pdf
>Picks up in the second half, but the payoffs are in the final third to fifth. >Yes, read the chapter subheadings and translate where appropriate for context and 5shadowing >If you can't visualize the flora, look it up
1st half: Immersed in a slightly mystical, colder reality. A cowboys nightmares. Peak of the novel is in here.
3rd quarter: They kill stuff for a while it's pretty boring.
4th quarter: Dancing bears and schizophrenic rambling.
The pretentious speeches and prose is cool at first but I was sick of it by the end. Maybe that's the intention so you start to hate the judge more.
In other pieces of entertainment there's always something to cut through the mud of philosophy, in The Road and No Country For Old Men it's more subliminal rather than obnoxious dialogue riddles.
Rust Cohle has Marty to tell him to shut up.
Infinite Jest's full of comedic breaks to get away from DFW's wanking.
Didn't feel like I could get a break in Blood Meridian.
How come Glanton, or the Priest never give The Judge shit or something? They all just accept it, maybe they wanted him to just shut up so they didn't interact back, like when you're arguing with a narcissist. One of my favorite parts is when people are just fricking around in San Francisco because it doesn't have any of the aforementioned annoyances.
They never pushed back because the Judge was 10 times smarter than all of the murdering cow-pokes in the gang. There were a couple times when a character would disagree with something The Judge said only for The Judge to verbally run circles around the guy. I think it was less that they didn't want to, as much as they all quickly learned they couldn't and it wasn't worth the trouble of trying.
Besides, what are they going to do? Disagree with him that the world exists to be conquered and controlled as they murder Indians for the benefit of settlers moving there? Disagree with him that warfare is the ultimate thing men should aspire to as they ride place to place killing and pillaging for a living? Even when characters in the gang disagreed with him intellectually, he would make it point to show that they in fact agreed him through the way they lived and the things they actually did.
Evil. Murders. Lack of punctuation.
American babble, never understood how anyone could be so proud butchering English
Edginess.
Reddit: The Book
ah, blood meridian, monsieur? that novel is the sark and chaparral of literature, the filament whereon rode the remuda of highbrow, corraled out of some destitute hacienda upon the arroya, quirting and splurting with main and with pyrolatrous coagulate of lobated grandiloquence. our eyes rode over the pages, monsieur, of that slatribed azotea like argonauts of suttee, juzgados of swole, bights and systoles of walleyed and tyrolean and carbolic and tectite and scurvid and querent and creosote and scapular malpais and shellalagh. we scalped, monsieur, the gantlet of its esker and led our naked bodies into the rebozos of its mennonite and siliceous fauna, wallowing in the jasper and the carnelian like archimandrites, teamsters, combers of cassinette scoria, centroids of holothurian chancre, with pizzles of enfiladed indigo panic grass in the saltbush of our vigas, true commodores of the written page, rebuses, monsieur, we were the mygale spiders too and the devonian and debouched pulque that settled on the frizzen studebakers, listening the wolves howling in the desert while we saw the judge rise out of a thicket of corbelled arches, whinstone, cairn, cholla, lemurs, femurs, leantos, moonblanched nacre, uncottered fistulas of groaning osnaburg and kelp, isomers of fluepipe and halms awap of griddle, guisado, pelancillo.
I've never related to a bald guy so much in my entire life.
Wendigoon has utterly annihilated any civil discussions around Blood Meridian. This isn't due to newbies either. Frick me, that would've been the best outcome from what Wendigoon has released. What that youtuber with a 5 hour long video covering the most gruesome american literature to date has done, is summon orangutans that only know to communicate and discuss in contrarianism.
I still have no idea what wendiwhoon even said because I never watched the video. I don't believe that a single person could damage the discussion of literature, it is an utterly ridiculous exaggeration.
That’s what I am saying. It literally did nothing but bring a bit of spotlight on one of the most gruesome works of literature of American literacy. There’s few people that would be interested on tuning in a five hour long video that describes fricked up shit. Its mostly contrarians that try to bring down the book because its “normiefied”.
I see. At the very least, it adds some weird performative element to discussions where one pretends scaled (and worse) dying men is not terrible. It's not that violence was new to me in any way, I grew up with rotten dot com and faces of death. But what makes the violence noteworthy is the historicity and relative recency of the setting. If it weren't for that, I probably wouldn't have cared at all. At least there are more things to think about in the book than violence, but some readers cannot move beyond it.
That and a mentally ill Hispanic is too butthurt about McCarthy to let anyone discuss in peace.
You can make the most psychotic evil character ever and some moronic virgin from Ohio or whatever will still say something like "that's literally me".
It’s free with audible plus and I’m halfway through and it’s boring, I don’t want to quit halfway through the book because everyone raves about it so it has to get better right but it’s just boring.
It's repetitive and it might even be tedious if you're not the mood. By the middle it has basically already peaked.
in the mood*
I’ll tough it out, it’s free and I listen to it while driving around for work so no loss to me. I just thought I’d like it more. I like westerns like the Virginian and Riders of the Purple Sage and I like gritty western films like Bone Tomahawk so I thought I’d like this book but I don’t know maybe I’m just too smoothbrained for it.
Maybe part of the appeal of this is the “oooooh descriptive blood and gore and violence oooooh” part but my favorite things to read are memoirs of combat vets and those get pretty detailed and gritty so maybe I’m just desensitized to the fictional violence of this novel.
reminder if you "listen" to the audiobook you didn't actually read the book
same with ereaders
> same with ereaders
Why? Aren’t you still reading and engaging with the lecture?
nope.
moron
The last third is where it peaks.
I’ve read it and listened. Reading was much more enjoyable for this one.
Descriptions of desert landscape in a biblical mode. Characters acting as symbols. Some violence.
The beginning of each chapter lays out the scenes the same way Darwin's The Origin of Species lays out its content. Keep that in mind.
That’s an old-fashioned convention in Western literature that can be found going a while back (the laying out of numerous detailed subheadings summarizing each chapter or section), also sometimes called the “argument” (an older word for an abstract/summary) of a poem or work of literature. Barth also does it in The Sot-Weed Factor as part of the book’s parody of 18th-century literature, for instance. Here it is in Smollett’s Peregrine Pickle. (This is also, I imagine, where Pynchon picks up the convention of starting many chapter titles of V. with “In which…”, since it also shows up frequently in this convention of chapter subheading summaries).
However, the way McCarthy does it is uniquely interesting because there’s a few instances, if I remember right, where he subtly suggests something of theological/symbolic/allusive import through use of rare or archaic word choices in these abstracts which add a little something to the chapter that isn’t explicitly stated in the chapter itself.
spitting and mexican food and rape and desert flora
Click in this link,if you want a free and a good writing and grammar,and fascinating metaphors and figurative language.
https://altair.pw/pub/lib/Cormac%20Mccarthy%20-%20The%20Blood%20Meridian.pdf
Glanton's thrapple
you're gonna read "the heel of his palm" a bunch
Lots of blood. Not so much meridian.
>Picks up in the second half, but the payoffs are in the final third to fifth.
>Yes, read the chapter subheadings and translate where appropriate for context and 5shadowing
>If you can't visualize the flora, look it up
Blood
Meridian
there are thousands of reddit threads about this. pointless and contrived post
A tour-de-force
1st half: Immersed in a slightly mystical, colder reality. A cowboys nightmares. Peak of the novel is in here.
3rd quarter: They kill stuff for a while it's pretty boring.
4th quarter: Dancing bears and schizophrenic rambling.
The pretentious speeches and prose is cool at first but I was sick of it by the end. Maybe that's the intention so you start to hate the judge more.
In other pieces of entertainment there's always something to cut through the mud of philosophy, in The Road and No Country For Old Men it's more subliminal rather than obnoxious dialogue riddles.
Rust Cohle has Marty to tell him to shut up.
Infinite Jest's full of comedic breaks to get away from DFW's wanking.
Didn't feel like I could get a break in Blood Meridian.
How come Glanton, or the Priest never give The Judge shit or something? They all just accept it, maybe they wanted him to just shut up so they didn't interact back, like when you're arguing with a narcissist. One of my favorite parts is when people are just fricking around in San Francisco because it doesn't have any of the aforementioned annoyances.
They never pushed back because the Judge was 10 times smarter than all of the murdering cow-pokes in the gang. There were a couple times when a character would disagree with something The Judge said only for The Judge to verbally run circles around the guy. I think it was less that they didn't want to, as much as they all quickly learned they couldn't and it wasn't worth the trouble of trying.
Besides, what are they going to do? Disagree with him that the world exists to be conquered and controlled as they murder Indians for the benefit of settlers moving there? Disagree with him that warfare is the ultimate thing men should aspire to as they ride place to place killing and pillaging for a living? Even when characters in the gang disagreed with him intellectually, he would make it point to show that they in fact agreed him through the way they lived and the things they actually did.
>And then he spat.