1. Read the following excerpt from a critical article by Barbara Bennett (Notes on Contemporary Literature, Nov. 2008):
True to Cormac McCarthy's roots, his latest book The Road (and to some degree, his previous novel NoCountry for Old Men ) is replete with Celtic influences and allusions to one of Ireland's favorite poets, W. B. Yeats. The title of No Country, of course, is a quotation from Yeats' "Sailing to Byzantium" and works in a thematic sense as a prequel to The Road. In the final paragraph of No Country, Sheriff Bell recounts a dream he had of his father, riding on horseback through a cold and snowy pass in the mountains. As his father passes him. Bell sees that "he was carrying fire in the horn" and knew that his father was "goin on ahead and that he was fixin to make a fire somewhere out there in all that dark and all that cold" (309). In this final section. Bell also recounts the story of a man who, in the midst of an unsettled wilderness, "set down with a hammer and chisel and carved out a stone water trough to last ten thousand years." Bell wonders at the "faith" this man shows, believing it was "some sort of promise in his heart" for future generations--a promise Bell feels he himself could not make (308-9).
The phrase from Bell's dream, "carrying the fire," is a significant refrain in The Road, spoken between the unnamed father and son. Most reviewers have generally agreed that the "fire" is hope, spiritual belief, or truth, but a closer understanding of Celtic tradition reveals what McCarthy more likely meant. In the Celtic culture, the hearth fire was the center of family activity, providing warmth, light, and food for the family. Another writer with Appalachian roots, Ron Rash, describes the significance of the hearth fire in his novel, Saints at the River: "A family's hearth fire was never allowed to die down completely....When children left to marry and raise their own families, they took fire from their parents' hearth with them. It was both heirloom and talisman, nurtured and protected because generations recognized it for what it was--living memory"(111).
How does this help you to make sense of the ending scene in the novel? How can you relate this final chapter to the characters, themes, action of the novel? Consider both the memory of the man and the water trough and the dream of Bell's father.
2. IF you have seen the Coen brothers' film adaptation of this novel, discuss how well it translates to the screen. Be specific in your comparing and contrasting of the two!
As I finished the last two chapters in class and set the book down right before writing that essay, I feel like I really didn't have the time necessary to reflect on the novel and wrap my mind around it's ending and all of it's amazingness before jumping headlong into an analytical paper (oof), so thank you for this!
ReplyDeleteBell reflects on a dream about his father carrying the fire, and having read The Road, I immediately connected the two. Throughout The Road, the fire is what keeps the boy and his father from giving in to the harsh realities of the post apocalyptic world; it maintains the better qualities of humanity. The connection to Yeats' poem helps further the importance of the fire and its connection to living on through family. In dreaming of his father riding past him with the father, I think that Sheriff Bell has confided his belief in the end of human benevolence, that it is now a quality of the past and he has failed at carrying on the fire. Cormac McCarthy throws humanity's downfalls at you in such a thought-provoking manner, that it is fantastic and bothersome in the same. I love it, but it can be quite disparaging to get stuck on the thought of where manners and kindness have disappeared to...and how. Or if they ever really existed.
Maybe the everlasting quality of the Celtic hearth fire is McCarthy's hope for a turn one day and that the fire could be up ahead with Bell's father waiting for him. Only time can tell.
Darius made a good point here. Although the ending carries a sense of hopelessness, nevertheless, the never meant hope was obsoleted. And just like Emily craftively conneced The Road with No Country, the ending is exposed to personal interpretation. Like I saw in my own group, some disliked Bell implying there is no hope left for his society, some, such I, were absolutly intrigued by the way book ends. The way I see, it's as if McCarthy meant to pass on the message to us. Like a call, perhaps, for us to take on that fire, to take on that fight that exhausted Bell to the core. Bell was perhaps the "old man" in a "country" were he no longer belonged, but us, we are not "old", and neither can we say we dont belong in this "new country". We are part of that generation with the responsability to pass on the fire for future generations, and we should take on the steps where Bell could not go.
ReplyDeleteAs for the ending, I feel that the trough and the man represent the moral conflict that Bell is trying to resolve. He feels that fighting crime and upholding social morals will not have any influence on the future. The trough represents a fight for morality and peace, while the time it withstands represents the sin and violence that have become pervasive in modern society.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, my first assumption of the dream about his father was that his father was paving the way for Bell into the after life. It was a form of closure for Bell, and that his fight for morality was actually honorable and worth while, and it was as though his father was approving him. I don't know, maybe I am crazy.
The movie was pretty good, but left out some stuff. I am not sure if I would have liked it as much if I had not read the book, but I liked seeing the book played out. Also didn't like the ending in the movie, much too flat. I did love the actor they chose for Chigurh, what a creeper.
1) Reading this article helped me understand why McCarthy chose to use the trough and Bell's dream to conclude the novel. McCarthy used the story about the trough to reveal the promise that something will always be there to help guide future generations, which is important because Bell wants to keep this promise but doesn’t feel like he has. Although Bell tries to fulfill this promise, he feels like he has failed because he is not able to keep his promise, making sure Moss is safe, to Carla Jean. This promise also causes Bell to have a difficult time adapting to the present, and causes him to dwell on the past and reflect on the differences between the past generations and present generations. To me Bell’s dream not only his father paving the way for him, but also past generations paving the way for future ones. Bell’s father would rather sacrifice himself to harsh conditions so that his son would not have to suffer. Bell makes this same sacrifice as sheriff because he risks his life in order to maintain order and instill discipline in the new generation. Unlike past generations, the present generation has not followed the path that past generations have created for them; instead they turn to violence, drugs, and money as their driving force. The memory of the trough conveys a sense of hope for the present and future generations because there will always be something from the past that would help guide them.
ReplyDelete2) The film version of the novel was well translated, but it did miss some important parts from the novel. In the film none of Sheriff Bell’s personal thoughts that began every chapter of the book were portrayed in the film. Bell’s personal thoughts are important because they give insight into his thoughts about life and how different the present is from the past. The film also differed from the book when it came to the girl Moss meets while he is on his way to El Paso; in the novel the girl is a hitchhiker who Moss picks up on his way to El Paso, but in the film Moss meets the girl at the pool while he is waiting for Carla at a hotel. I think Tommy Lee Jones did a very good job of playing Sheriff Bell because he was able to embody Bell as a man who has a burden on his shoulder that needs to be resolved. I also thought that Javier Bardem depicted Chigurh perfectly because he looked unsympathetic, cold, and all around humorless, just like Chigurh was characterized in the book. Josh Brolin was a good actor to play Moss because he looked like common man and was able to stay relaxed just like Moss in the novel. I think the film was good and helped me better understand scenes from the book and the order in which certain events happened, as well as helping me understand important facts that I might have overlooked when I read.
The movie adaptation is indeed very solid, and I thoroughly enjoyed myself during the copious moments of heightened suspense and tension (the hotel chase scene in particular).
ReplyDeleteHowever, the question remains: is the movie faithful to the novel? Well, in a sense, supposedly yes; characters, overall plotline, and some themes remain intact in the film adaptation. But there is one subtle detail that not too many people speculate about.
The suitcase of cash. Or, more specifically, the scene between Chigurh and his "employer."
Recall that, in the book, Chigurh--dressed nicely in a suit--meets with a businessman (most likely, the boss), suitcase in hand; hoping to gain some sort of job or promotion in return. In the film, however, Chigurh doesn't have the suitcase, wearing his regular clothing, and shoots the man.
The difference? Well, in the book, this simple yet mysterious exchange between the two men might actually be one of the most crucial scenes of the entire novel, in a more subtle way. There is a certain level of context illustrated beneath Chigurh's dialogue, claiming that he works for a "new generation of men" (or something along those lines). Or, the "new men." That, and he feels the "old men" are nothing much else but a dying breed. Hence the title, No Country for Old Men. At least to me, this explains why Chigurh tracks down the suitcase; to become a part of the new men. And what would these new men be? Well, the men could practically be anything. But, the odd thing is, both Chigurh and the businessman wear suits. Kind of like, if the suits represented a hidden symbol of the novel; signifying how proper and highly-developed-minded these two gentlemen behave and interact with one another; much more professional compared to the rest of the characters like Officer Bell and Moss. On further note, that also might help explain why Chigurh and Moss are almost the same age; Chigurh is the new man, while Moss is the old man. Age difference doesn't matter. What does matter, is that Moss grew up and survives upon an old world, alienated by the rise of 'new' urban areas in the country, while Chigurh is strives to become a part of the new men by proving that he's capable for the job.
In film, Chigurh's character alters completely, as well as the theme of the "new men" bit. It is clear that Chigurh has failed his objective (to retrieve the suitcase of cash), thus he is unable to get the promotion he has hoped for, which might help explain why he wears his regular clothing instead of the suit in the film version. And, as for killing the businessman... perhaps it was done to show how cold-hearted Chigurh is? Who knows. But it's always interesting to analyze such a vague piece of work (book or film) and interpret what exactly what and how the media speaks to us.
To me, the memory of the trough shows the hope and perseverence against unknown things that mankind has. The mans sat down in the middle of no where and made this water trough in the hopes that it would be useful and that it would survive. He had faith that his actions would bring good into the world, which is what Bell hoped he was doing also. Bell worked against criminals of a foreign nature to him to try and do a good thing for people and maybe even give them hope.
ReplyDeleteThe fire represents both hope for the future and family. His father carried the fire into the darkness, paving the way for Bell in unknown territory where anything dangerous could be hiding. It seems like he is paving the way for Bell and for future generations too. He was going into uncharted territory and hoping that others would follow him and face whatever may be out there, good or bad. I wonder though, if Bell was meant to take the fire from his father and carry on the flame himself and lead the future generations. And if his failing to do this is synonymous to his failing to do what he promised and protect Moss.