Ian's Reviews > The Road

The Road by Cormac McCarthy
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
2465351
's review

did not like it
bookshelves: best-sellers-that-suck, unfulfilled-expectations, not-for-kids

I just read some guy's review of The Road that contained the following:

"In the three hours that I read this book I found myself crying, laughing, shouting, and most of the time my lip was trembling. ... As soon as I finished it, I sat there feeling numb, but not in a bad way, actually sort of like I was high."

Wow, dude. I mean, really? Your lip was trembling? And you felt high? And your lip was trembling? Pherphuxake, what do you even say to someone like that?
---------------------------------------------------------------------

The Road by Cormac McCarthy is an awful, awful book. I have to consciously restrain myself from judging those of you who believe the book has merit. Don’t worry, the fact that I’m part of a very small minority in this regard (only the smartest 3% of my fellow Goodreads bibliophiles also gave The Road a one-star review) has not escaped me. I am nevertheless convinced of the objective correctness of my position—notwithstanding the inherent subjective nature of any literary discussion—and I will maintain with my dying breath that The Road should have been named The Rod because it represents nothing more than Cormac McCarthy’s attempt to proclaim to the world that he has a big literary dick.

I have constructed a list of factors that increase a book’s suck quotient and I fear The Road exhibits most of them. Let’s check my list and see which things appear in The Road:

• A plot that lacks clear beginning or ending (check)
• Important characters who don't grow or learn from their experiences (check)
• Important characters whose actions lack clear motivation (check)
• Scenes and dialogue that are repetitive or unoriginal (check)
• Violence and gore included for shock value (check)
• Locations and settings that are ambiguous (check)
• History and backstory that are ambiguous (check)
• Grammar and punctuation used in a pretentious or self-indulgent manner (check)
• Pronouns and punctuation used in an ambiguous manner (check)
• Metaphors and analogies that appear contrived, forced and disjointed (check)

Okay, to be fair The Road doesn’t exhibit most of the suck-quotient factors; it exhibits all of them. It's as though McCarthy deliberately designed his book to be the antithesis of what I think makes for quality reading.

Now before I get any further, let’s get a couple of things out of the way. Much is made of McCarthy’s failure to use quotation marks and other punctuation, with some finding it brilliant and some finding it pretentious and self-indulgent. I make my home in the pretensions-and-self-indulgent camp. In fact I find McCarthy’s treatment of punctuation nauseating; it is his way of saying:

“My words are so beautiful, perfect, and complete that they stand on their own. I require no punctuation to convey my meaning. Indeed my message is too powerful to be contained by the same convention that restricts the middling novelist, too important to suffer the vandalism of punctuation.”

Thus, leaving out punctuation can be not only confusing for the reader, but also revoltingly self-indulgent and arrogant. However, that being said, I don’t believe The Road sucks merely because it lacks quotation marks. I’m okay with such a tool if it’s used for a purpose that adds to the message being conveyed, à la Blindness. So punctuation is not the only suck-quotient factor here. Instead, I believe The Road sucks because it sucks every possible way a book can suck. The purposeless lack of quotation marks and other punctuation is merely one symptom of the enormity of the book’s suckitude.

It’s important to understand that this is not just a matter me disliking The Road. I have an almost vehement reaction to The Road and to the rather large group of slobbering, screaming, panties-throwing admirers. In the interest of intellectual honesty, I challenged myself to figure out why this is. Why can’t I just abhor The Road while letting other people have their moronic fun? Why must I look down on people who love The Road with a feeling of disgusted superiority? Why do I care if others enjoy the mental equivalent of dipping bread into horse diarrhea and pretending it’s award-winning fondue?

It took some soul-searching to learn the answer: I react vehemently to The Road because fans and critics of literature love to stroke McCarthy’s Rod, while works of science fiction—my favorite genre—are dismissed regardless of their merit. Critics praise The Road but glibly waive off sci-fi as a genre for people who never grew out of their childlike amusement for light sabers or their adolescent fascination with space battles. Sci-fi is relegated to its own awards and events, left out of consideration for broader literary honors, leaving me with the impression that the literary world does not perceive sci-fi to be real, legitimate literature. But from my point of view The Road is the adolescent work. By the standards under which I would judge a quality sci-fi novel (or any quality novel), The Road is shallow and simple, along with unoriginal and obvious. The Road is to my favorite sci-fi as a toddler’s splashing pool is to Lake Tahoe. It is beyond me how The Road can be the guest of honor while much deeper books with beautiful language and original, thought-provoking ideas are not even invited to the party because they happen to be sci-fi.

Of course the other 97% disagree with my assessment of The Road as shallow and unoriginal. They believe that I just didn't get it, that I couldn’t see past McCarthy’s prose and unconventional punctuation. They tell me The Road is rich and deep. They tell me to forget the quotation marks and the nameless characters and look at what McCarthy is trying to tell us. The Road tells us this, and it talks about that, and speaks to this other thing.

Then the 38% who gave The Road five stars lose themselves in their collective self-amplified group hysteria. “The Road is so so so great!” they yell in unison. “Please take my panties, Mr. McCarthy!” they yell at some imaginary stage. “Here, Mr. McCarthy please sign my boobs!” And that’s where I have to walk away.

The thing is, though, I didn’t have a difficult time seeing what The Road tells us and talks about and speaks to; I just didn't find any of it to be especially deep, enlightening, or insightful. The book was easy to read and simple to comprehend. It didn’t make me think. Everything was right there on the surface, served with a spoon, and what we were served had no flavor, no spice, no originality. So it’s not that The Road lacks all substance. If it weren’t for the nonstop nauseating self-indulgence I would have given it two stars and might recommend it to people who are new to the reading scene. My problem is that, for something so beloved and critically acclaimed, for something written by a writer with such talent, The Road fails utterly, a shell without substance that collapses in upon itself in a heap of triteness and unoriginality. To put it yet another way, The Road was just so goddamn boring.

I want a book that makes me pay attention and use my noggin. I want to work at peeling back layers and making connections. When I find them, I want the author's ideas and insights to be original, edifying, and thought-provoking. I want artful prose, relatable characters, realistic motivations, and poetic plot points. And guess what, I find no shortage of books on the sci-fi shelves that meet those criteria.

Now let’s see if we can tie things together. There are plenty of truly excellent books of contemporary literature; I have read and enjoyed several, including one or two that have touched me deeply. Likewise there are plenty of truly excellent books on the sci-fi genre. For some reason one genre is invited to the party and the other isn’t. I don’t know why that is, beyond an apparent assumption made by haughty critics and readers that sci-fi is for kids. Now, I’m not trying to say that all sci-fi is wonderful. There’s plenty of crappy sci-fi out there, just like there’s plenty of crap in any genre. My point is simply that, despite the dismissive attitude of many literary critics, the sci-fi shelves contain books that are as good as anything out there: books as rich and complex, as insightful and layered, as edifying and beautiful as anything in contemporary literature. So when something like The Road is hailed as a masterpiece while some truly brilliant works of sci-fi—works that could mop the floor with The Road in every facet— are acknowledged only by a roll of the eyes ... well, I think you see why I can’t be happy just to dislike The Road and let everyone else have their fun.
346 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The Road.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

June 29, 2009 – Shelved
Started Reading
July 1, 2009 – Finished Reading
September 3, 2009 – Shelved as: best-sellers-that-suck
May 25, 2010 – Shelved as: unfulfilled-expectations
February 7, 2011 – Shelved as: not-for-kids

Comments Showing 1-50 of 72 (72 new)


message 1: by notgettingenough (last edited Jun 06, 2010 11:28AM) (new)

notgettingenough I almost bought a McCarthy book the other day, not this one, but when I actually had it in my hands and opened it up it scared me. AND it was awfully awfully long.

However, I did want to see the movie...presumably it isn't high on your list of what to do before you die?


message 2: by Ian (new) - rated it 1 star

Ian Come on people! I wanted screaming and gnashing of teeth! Rotten vegetables and rending of garments! Why aren't you Cormac McCarthy rod-strokers angry with me?!?!

Is it just that everyone on both sides is sick and tired of talking about this shitty excuse for a book? Does trashing a review and demanding that I perform anatomically improbable acts mean nothing anymore?!?!


message 3: by Eh?Eh! (new)

Eh?Eh! *eyes welling*
You're a meanie!
*runs away*


message 4: by [deleted user] (last edited Dec 31, 2010 04:48PM) (new)

*throws rotten vegetables*

As you know, I'm not the one to be defending this, and I don't agree with all of your criticisms. Our conversation made me realize what I didn't like about The Road: it's not a story, it's a situation. A nicely detailed situation, but it's pretty darn static. I still did like the book on the balance, and the language was beautiful to me. But I enjoy your anger, and always enjoy a good rampage. Well, not always, but you know.


Randy Watched the movie this weekend with the family-- not bad for a $3 rental...the main scenes were there but not the wonderful descriptions or dialogue.

Where were the quote marks? I wonder if the screen play had quote marks or punctuation of any kind?

Hey, Ian!!! If you want a fuckin' road side bomb to go off in your outside garbage can, you're gonna have to hit the road to Afganistan.

The tender hearts of Good Reads could never bombast you because you've had a little explosive diarrhea over ole Cormac's masterpiece.

Anyway, I've got cucumbers to plant, a story to revise, a children's program to bring into fruition and bills to pay so good luck at getting rises from GoodReaders...too-da-loo.


message 6: by Paul (last edited Jun 27, 2010 03:40PM) (new) - added it

Paul Bryant Nice one Ian - you have exactly the same relationship with The Road as I do with American Psycho, except that I get quite a few women on my side. But I did get the rotten vegetables and eggs, so I think a lot of readers like misogynous violence more than existential angst in the form of giant metaphors. So it goes. Whilst my relationship with good ole boy Cormac is complicated, I wouldn't want to read The Road - but - is this a bad thing? - I thought the movie was pretty... pretty.. pretty good.


message 7: by [deleted user] (new)

interesting. i havent read the road, just have never felt particularly compelled to... but since a couple of people have mentioned the movie: i thought it was awful.


message 8: by David (last edited Jun 27, 2010 06:06PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

David I think your listing of Dune as an all-time favorite novel sufficiently rebuts your review. That may be ad hominem-ish, but these are matters of taste... And one might (rightly, I think) presume that an affection for Frank Herbert's clunky, utilitarian prose makes you ineligible to hold an opinion on this and many other books. But I'm surely being facetious (...).

This review is ridiculous, horrible, evil, stupid, satanic, and long. It's all of these things not because it's a negative review of The Road, but because it appears motivated primarily by a childish kicking-screaming tantrum about the cultural status of sci-fi (boo and hoo) and by very conservative ideas of what good fiction should be. (Really? Ambiguous locations and history, tweaked grammar, and absence of a traditional beginning and ending make a book 'suck'? Really? Maybe Charles Dickens is your man.)


message 9: by Ian (new) - rated it 1 star

Ian Oophth!
*gets hit in cheek with tomato*

Humph!
*gets hit in stomach with cucumber*

Ayyeeee!
*gets hit in eye with grape*

Now this is more like it! Finally a comment with some passion! The perfect mix of disdain, contempt, disregard, hyperbole and irony. Well done, David. Well done.


message 10: by Ian (new) - rated it 1 star

Ian Paul wrote: "Nice one Ian - you have exactly the same relationship with The Road as I do with American Psycho, except that I get quite a few women on my side. But I did get the rotten vegetables and eggs, so I ..."

Thanks, Paul. I recall your American Psycho review--and the irrationally vehement responses--very well. While I feel superior to people who love The Rod, I feel concern for the people who so passionately defend American Psycho.


message 11: by Whitaker (last edited Dec 31, 2010 08:00AM) (new)

Whitaker Ian, I so love what you said here:
I react vehemently to The Road because fans and critics of literature love to stroke McCarthy’s Rod, while works of science fiction—my favorite genre—are dismissed regardless of their merit... The Road is to my favorite sci-fi as a toddler’s splashing pool is to Lake Tahoe. It is beyond me how The Road can be the guest of honor while much deeper books with beautiful language and original, thought-provoking ideas are not even invited to the party because they happen to be sci-fi.
It reminds me of how mainstream critics lurrvved Theroux's O-Zone , but science fiction critics pointed out that it was trite, silly and had been done far better by many sci-fi writers before him.


message 12: by Scribble (last edited Dec 31, 2010 02:00PM) (new) - added it

Scribble Orca Ian, Whitaker directed me here. Seems we belong to the same 3%, although I should not be included by dint of my IQ, of course (just in case I raise any unrealistic expectations).

I enjoyed your review because you far better articulate some of the reasons why it doesn't work for me, as well as provide new reasons not to. I hadn't even thought about it not making the grade as sci-fi. My argument was reflected more along the lines of "The Road fails utterly, a shell without substance that collapses in upon itself in a heap of triteness...."


message 13: by Robert (new)

Robert I have to take issue with you over some points in this review!

First, "...writer of such talent." I haven't read The Road. I'm never going to read The Road. This is because I read All the Pretty Horses, which was the most pointless waste of effort I'd read since The Bridge of San Luis Ray...

Second, Orwell said (I paraphrase from memory), "Write so that your meaning is unmistakeable.) I believe books can be worthwhile even if the offer no subtlety or subtext; some books are a punch in the face (e.g. 1984, Orwell practised what he preached). Some books offer complexity and subtlety (e.g. The Hyperion Cantos). Both can be meritorious.

Dunno if that fits into the veg throwing style of comment you wanted but it's my best attempt!


message 14: by Ian (new) - rated it 1 star

Ian Well, okay, maybe McCarthy is a no-talent ass clown. But I didn't want to come right out and say that in the review.

And I agree there are worthwhile books with little or no subtlety or subtext. McCarthy's Rod isn't one of them. You want to hit me in the face with a point? Go for it. Make it something interesting, something maybe I hadn't considered before. Don't hit me with something that's obvious to everyone who's ever been born upon first glance.

Hmmm, let me think ... would a father still love his son and try to keep him warm and fed if life got rough? Hmmm. Why yes, I think the father would. Oh, but what if we put the father and son in an ambiguous exaggerated dystopia where creepy roving cannibals are trying to eat the boy, what then, huh? Well, after long and thoughtful consideration, I believe the father still would love his son and do his best to keep the kid warm and fed. Also, I believe the father would love his son enough to try and prevent the kid from becoming some creepy roving cannibal's afternoon snack.

"Dunno if that fits into the veg throwing style of comment you wanted but it's my best attempt!"

I'll count your post, Robert, as an overripe avocado hitting me in the kneecap. How's that?


message 15: by Robert (new)

Robert Good enough!;-)


message 16: by Aaditya (new)

Aaditya Mandalemula Really, you have said what exactly I felt when I was reading this book. The Protagonists just move on and on and on and they discuss, they discuss, and they move on and on and on and again they discuss. They same movement. The same discussions. Nothing really new came even after I read the Hundredth page. It is just moving without any real aim, kind of.


message 17: by E.J. (new) - rated it 3 stars

E.J. I agree that the book was slightly boring and that the lack of punctuation confounded me. I enjoyed the book as an overall large description, nothing more. As a novel, I didn't enjoy it too horribly much, but as a description, it was excellent.

There is only one thing that you said I don't like: While I feel superior to people who love The Rod...

Just because they like the book, that doesn't make them inferior. It just means that they enjoyed a very good description without any action. And maybe that's all it was meant to be... a description. Hating a book doesn't make you superior, neither does it make the lovers inferior. You are both equals who enjoy different styles of writing.


message 18: by Ian (new) - rated it 1 star

Ian You're certainly right about the book being a description--as one previous commenter put it, the book is a situation, not a story. If someone likes long-winded descriptions of situations, that's fine, but I don't. My problem is that the book was billed as a novel--as a story--which it isn't. It's a really long, repetative description of a situation, and one filled with hyperbole at that.

The superior comment was intended in jest and irony. I was making fun of the elitist-tinged love for this book: the notion, for example, that McCarthy was brilliant for writing without punctuation and those who were confused or annoyed by it lack imagination; or the notion that those who don't like McCarthy's language lack the ability to appreciate sophisticated artful expression; or, even, the notion that those of us who think a novel is more enjoyable if it contains a story rather than merely a situation are stuck in some obsolete paradigm. My point was not that those who liked the book are inferior, but rather that those of us who didn't like it are not inferior.


message 19: by E.J. (new) - rated it 3 stars

E.J. That is a much better way to put it, thank you. And you are completely right that it shouldn't have been billed as a novel. That's why I gave it a higher rating, because I didn't think of it as a novel.

I didn't understand the no punctuation either because it made it harder to understand what was happening. It might have looked better than other works, but it was much more difficult to know what was going on, especially when the characters had "conversations."


message 20: by Roy (new) - rated it 1 star

Roy "You know what’s more unsettling than a child screaming when he finds a dead infant? A child not screaming when he finds a dead infant. And really, that’s the more likely outcome. The young boy has never known another world--by this point, he would be used to death and horror, that would be his reality. Anyone who has seen a picture of a Rwandan child with an AK-47 realizes that children adapt to what’s around them. And you know what would make a great book? A father who remembers the old world trying to prevent his son from becoming a callous monster because of the new one."

This part of your review is especially good.

I need a writer to give at least some passing thought to the setting and have at least one of the trinity of what makes a novel a novel present. All three pillars of the novel are missing from The Road, it lacks plot, story and character development.

I've never come across such a glaring example of the Emperor having no clothes as this book.


message 21: by Bill (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bill To such a person, you say, "please teach me something about literature."


Christine I hated it too. Just because I don't like a book does not mean that it is a bad book, however, it was dry and there are numerous books that do this bleak future idea without making you want to put your face in a toaster oven. It's like the author wrote down a list of things that he thought would depress people the most and put it into a novel.


Steph Campbell Woah, that was a rant and a half.
I resepect your opinion and can see where you are coming from, but as a 15 year old who loves science fiction and adventure novels I would like to say I loved this book.
I'd never read any of McCarthy's books before and I agree that judging by the quote you used he sounds like a bit of an arse. But that doesn't have much to do with the writing really, other than the lack of punctuation which overall didn't really bother me whilst reading it. I can see how it would bother some people, but surely as a book lover you can get over it easily enough.
I think you are however missing the point of this book. The list of things you put that the book lacks do not add up to the equation of a good novel in my eyes at all. The Cathcer in The Rye, one of the most critically acclaimed books of all time, doesn't have a solid plot line or paticularly well developed characters, yet I have never met a person that has read it who can't relate to Holden in one way or another.
Aside from that I think you have missed the main situation these characters are in, which was the reason I respected them from the moment I learned it anyway. They make mistakes and then have to make more in order to survive; you can't learn from mistakes in a world where taking risks is your only option.
And as for the settings and history being ambiguos, from what I gathered that was the point. This book wasn't trying to prove anything from where it was set, or the background that it had; the overall aim was to tell the story of a father and his son, which I think was acheived incredibly. Both of the characters develop over the novel, not immediatley, as they discovering more about themselves and one another with each obstacle the road throws at them, despite as you say yourself both coming from different worlds. The man is hardened by his experiences and the loss of his world, whereas the boy is innocent and naive, born into a world where horror is the norm. It shows the contrast beautifully. And that I think was McCarthy's main aim.
If you say that a father remebering the old world and trying to prevent his child from becoming a monster beacuse of the new one would make a great book, then I think you should consider re-reading this. There are various situations where the father is ultimatley torn between doing what he considers is best for his son and what his son thinks is right; it always results in the second.


message 24: by Emily (new) - rated it 1 star

Emily Moroz I can't even believe how accurate this rating was. I just finished reading this for my AP lit class and I couldn't believe how horrible McCarthy's writing style was. I got angry every single line because of his lack of punctuation and apostrophes. And everyone in my class was like "oh you clearly juste don't understand his artistic writing style." So thank you so much for agreeing with me that this book was absolutely ridiculous.


message 25: by Hong (new) - rated it 3 stars

Hong I haven't finished the book and I don't know if I'll like it at the end or not. I'll start with that. What frustrates me about this review is that it is not a review, but a rant masquerading as an expression of your higher intellect. You are giving sci fi a bad representative by being so aggressive and plain unpleasant. perhaps you should reconsider what a review is, and save your rant for a blog post... otherwise, you're simply wasting everyone's time by being an attention seeking loud mouth. In short, it's hard to take you seriously.


Diana Febry I believe my lip may have quivered slightly when I read your review.


Tracy St Claire I gave this one a two-star, because I reserve the bottom for the worst of the worst and I did get through this one. I agree with your points. I'm glad I'm not the only one who needs pretty words + actual literature to earn my stars. No, my lips weren't trembling.


message 28: by Bobby (new) - added it

Bobby Bermea Diana wrote: "I believe my lip may have quivered slightly when I read your review."

Hahahahahahahaha...

This book is actually on my list to read. I'm a huge fan of both Blood Meridian and No Country for Old Men but this review is hysterical and it's always good to know that somewhere, someone's not buying even the great ones.


message 29: by Bobby (new) - added it

Bobby Bermea Hey Ian, you mention truly brilliant works of sci-fi that are only acknowledged by a roll of the eyes. Maybe you could make a reading list or start such a list and others could add on to it as well? Whether or not I wind up feeling the same way about the road as you do, I'm absolutely positive that there is a massive amount of underrated, unknown or just hard to find sci-fi out there that deserves to be read. Think about it.


message 30: by Kris (new) - rated it 1 star

Kris Ashton Kudos on this review, Ian. I am one of your fellow 3 percenters. All your problems with this book were also mine. In my short, out-of-patience review, I made passing reference to its unoriginality in the broader scope of science fiction, but I think you're right: that is the most galling thing, even worse than the pretentious shunning of punctuation. Haughty critics *don't* read sci-fi or speculative fiction, and so had no idea The Road was one long, dreary cliche.


message 31: by Kris (new) - rated it 1 star

Kris Ashton Kudos on this review, Ian. I am one of your fellow 3 percenters. All your problems with this book were also mine. In my short, out-of-patience review, I made passing reference to its unoriginality in the broader scope of science fiction, but I think you're right: that is the most galling thing, even worse than the pretentious shunning of punctuation. Haughty critics *don't* read sci-fi or speculative fiction, and so had no idea The Road was one long, dreary cliche.


Michael So you feel superior? Good for you. Your review though is a testament of jealousy. But that's ok. We feel you.


message 33: by Matt (new) - rated it 2 stars

Matt Vesci While I agree with most of what I read in this review, especially the suck factor list, I didn't read the entire post as it was too much time to dedicate to this book. I did give it 2 stars, but that is mainly because I got through it. I reserve the 1 star for the offal that I don't have enough minutes of life to waste on it. (Also, I "read" this on audiobook, so missed the punctuation debacle, which would have driven me crazy).


Christina Fuentes Man after my own heart<3
I don't condone book burning... In fact, I'm sure most of us are repulsed and horrified by the very notion... However, I wouldn't lose any sleep over turning a mountain of copies of this drivel to ash.


message 35: by PJ (new) - rated it 5 stars

PJ You're taking this way too seriously.


Spencer Grafing Pat yourself on the back buddy. Seems like you need some positive reinforcement.


message 37: by Ren (new) - rated it 1 star

Ren "I have to consciously restrain myself from judging those of you who believe the book has merit. " BAHAHAHAHAHAH


message 38: by Ania (new)

Ania /iamverysmart/ Goodreads reviewer (check)


Debbie P I agree with your summation of The Road. I found it repeditive ie "I'm scared I know over and over. Not much of a plot I did expect much more after The Road has been given so many 5 stars and raved about on this site. Would recommend to readers whom like post apocalptic themes the nivel Anna by italian authour Niccola Ammeniti


message 40: by Carol (new)

Carol I haven't read this book, but now after reading your review and all the comments, I have to. I really know nothing about this author and have never even heard of the movie, but I really feel like you have been a real asshat on your review. I'm sure the book wasn't as bad as all that rambling you did. Cause seriously, you just rude. Can I ask you Ian, WHY? are you insulting all the readers so horribly. Did yo momma drop you on your head when you was little? Were you the fat kid everyone always picked on? Or were you the genius everyone hated, not because you were smarter than them, but because you were such an arrogant bastard that only thought he knew everything? Why don't you take yo panties off and shove up yo ars.


Andrea Moreno “This book doesn’t fit the manual for writing fiction that they gave me in school.” Bravo. Welcome to literature.


Steph This review is nonstop nauseating self-indulgence.


Thomas Personall, I'm not a fan of the sci-fi genre--I'm more of a mystery/suspense or nonfiction reader--but you and I are obviously in total agreement about this utter, dismal failure of a book!


message 44: by Amanda (new)

Amanda Sloan I think you're missing the point. It's a story about the love a father has for his son.


Isabel I think you made a really good point that I've been trying to put into words for so long--so many other books and genres get pushed aside for being "not mature enough" and not worthy of consideration (your example was sci-fi), meanwhile they give awards to books like The Road, and it just pisses the rest of us off. It's categorically Not A Good Book. He just knows the right gimmick to play to get Oo's and Ah's from the crowd, so I guess I can't fault him for figuring out the system?


Maeli I really agree with Amanda, Carol and Katie. The fact that you were so horribly rude to the author and his work, is one thing. But saying that anyone who thinks differently has a flawed opinion or is somehow incompetent is just disgusting. I personally loved the book, I know not every one did and that’s perfectly fine. It’s good actually, to express our different opinions and RESPECT each other. Not everything has to follow the usual guide lines for it to be a good story and there doesn’t even have to be a “hidden message” or deeper meaning that we are supposed to dissect. Can’t it just be an interesting story about a father and son?
And if anyone is “arrogant and self-indulged” it sure isn’t McCarthy. (It’s you. hypocrite)
“Only the smartest 3% of my fellow Goodreads bibliophiles also gave The Road a one-star review” to use your words, what do you even say to a person like that?
I don’t know if I’m just sensitive but the way some people talk about authors is just revolting. Don’t you see that these people work hard on these books and try to make them enjoyable for YOU?!? You’re calling this book a failure or a disgrace without any regard for other people. It’s sickening. I just have to say if some one ever talked about me the way you talk about McCarthy and his book. I would cry and key your car.
BY THE WAY lightsabers are freaking AWESOME.
I apologize for my rant, but I also don’t.


message 47: by Eli (new) - rated it 1 star

Eli I refuse to believe that somebody read this book in a single 3 hour sitting.


message 48: by Thomas (last edited May 03, 2021 07:47PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Thomas It could have been "an interesting story about a father and son" if McCarthy hadn't failed to make it one.

Personally, I know that authors generally "work hard on these books and try to make them enjoyable". I have massive respect for those who do both of those things, but I have no respect for authors who don't do either of those things. McCarthy in "The Road" didn't do either of those things.


message 49: by Elvia Xoxipilli (new)

Elvia Xoxipilli 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 is all I gotta say about your review….


message 50: by Sean (new) - rated it 1 star

Sean Bill wrote: "To such a person, you say, "please teach me something about literature.""

Why is it that people that like the book don't really explain it? I see so many of the "you need to read more" or "read more literature". I read 30 plus books a year. Read plenty of literature on the way to my degree. This book just lacks any character. And after a boring way of depicting hopelessness, ends with a cheap trope of hope at the end with the boy and stranger.


« previous 1
back to top