Authors: Michael Chabon
Cormac McCarthy would have suffered no risk to his literary reputation and presented no insurmountable difficulty to his large mainstream readership, therefore, if he had written a science-fiction novel called
The Road
about a father and son
making their painful way across the carbonized waste of a post-holocaust America. And it is possible to imagine his having written such a book. Though he is not known as a satirist, his
Blood Meridian,
about a ruthless band of bounty hunters looking for Indian scalps in Texas in the 1850s, can be read at least in part as a bloody pasquinade on the heroic literature of westward expansion. A pawky gallows humor is a reliable if underappreciated element in much of McCarthy’s work, and in his only recent novel to be set more or less in the contemporary world,
No Country for Old Men,
about a man in southwest Texas, running for his life after stealing millions of dollars from a drug cartel, there are strong hints of the outrage, disgust, and sense of ineluctable decline that drive the satirist. And for naturalism operating at the utmost extremes of the natural world and of human endurance, a McCarthy novel has no peer.
Indeed many reviewers, if they have not chosen to bestow on
The Road
the dispensation of calling it a fable or a parable, seem to have read
The Road
as the turn toward science fiction that any established literary writer may reasonably be permitted. “I’m always thrilled,” wrote Alan Cheuse, emphasizing the novelty and, perhaps, the faint air of slumming that attends the notion of McCarthy’s move to the science-fiction neighborhood, “when a fine writer of first-class fiction takes up the genre of science fiction and matches its possibilities with his or her own powers.” “Part fable, part science fiction, total nightmare,” said the reviewer in
USA Today,
having it both ways at once.
2.
In brief outline the relatively simple plot of
The Road
would seem to support such a reading. The book is set in the burned-over ruin
of what appears to be the southeastern United States, ten years after a man-made disaster that is never specified has destroyed not only civilization and society but also, seemingly, every form of life apart from an unknown but small number of starving, brutalized, and miserable humans, and at least—perhaps at most—one dog. The universal wildfires resulting from the initial “long sheer of light and then a series of low concussions” have burned so intensely for so long that the resultant cloud of ash blots out sun and stars. The forests are forests of ash; the days are cold and cheerless and the nights frigid. The unnamed protagonist, whose thoughts are so often presented without third-person attribution that at times he verges asymptotically near to being the novel’s narrator, spends his days trying to provide food, clothing, and warmth for his nameless son, who was born shortly after the disaster about ten years ago and has never known any world but this burned one.
Father and son travel south and east, toward the sea and what they hope will be a warmer climate. The father suffers from the respiratory ill-effects of a decade spent breathing ash and smoke, and is racked by spasms of bloody coughing that we understand from the first will eventually kill him. The son copes with the imperfectly understood and erratically imparted legacy of the past that he bears on his thin shoulders, attempting to reconcile the stories his father tells him with what is around him, to square the entire vanished culture and civilization implied by every word of American English that he speaks with the “cauterized terrain” of the unhistoried world he has inherited. It’s a dead planet, and human corpses, grotesque and pitiful and vividly depicted, people it.
The travelers make their way, rolling an old shopping cart piled with their pitiful hoard of canned food and blankets down
a melted interstate, cold, starving, endangered by every other human being whose path they cross. Before they reach the sea—which turns out to be no warmer or more congenial than anyplace else they have been—they regularly encounter scattered hanks of the living who remain on the depilated surface of the earth. With few exceptions these encounters are replete both with bleak violence and acute suspense for the reader. The eventual safety of a character in a McCarthy novel is always in doubt, but the reader’s usual sense that a disembowelment or a clean shot to the brainpan lies only a paragraph away has never been so excruciating as in
The Road,
where the life of a child whose innocence is literally singular is threatened from the first paragraph of the novel.
As they travel the father feeds his son a story, the nearest that he can come to a creed or a reason to keep on going: he and his son are “carrying the fire.” Of what this fire might consist he can never specify, but from this hopeful fiction or hopeless truth the boy seems to intuit a promise: that life will not always be thus; that it will improve, that beauty and purpose, sunlight and green plenty will return; in short, that everything is going to be “okay,” a word which both characters endlessly repeat to each other, touching it compulsively like a sore place or a missing tooth. They are carrying the fire through a world destroyed by fire, and therefore—a leap of logic or faith that by the time the novel opens has become almost insurmountable for both of them—the boy must struggle on, so that he can be present at, or somehow contribute to, the eventual rebirth of the world.
For the father their life of constant motion, his intermittent good luck at finding provisions, and above all his long habit of seeing his boy as the only thing in the world worth saving and the saving of him as his only reason to live, have engendered a religious sense of mission with regard to his son that is inevitably
defined as a greater salvation: it verges explicitly on the messianic. Apart from keeping his son’s body and soul together, this redemption is the father’s greatest preoccupation. But in the face of the bleakness and brutality of their lives his mission is difficult to sustain, and the father dies before he can see his son or the world redeemed.
Manifestly there is no reason to carry on, fire or not, through this “scabland,” which McCarthy portrays as so utterly defoliated and sterilized—the greatest corpse of all—that the idea of hope itself comes to seem like a kind of doom. The boy’s mother arrived early at this conclusion, killing herself when he was still a toddler. The impossibility of ever finding a home—literally, a place to live—is dramatized and proved by McCarthy in a poignant passage in which the travelers discover a miraculous backyard fallout shelter, intact, untouched, built by some unknown survivalist—and here is McCarthy’s humor at absolute zero—who failed to survive. Here they find warmth, light, enough provisions to keep them healthy and fed for a very long time. Yet they cannot stay; the shelter has been built to withstand fallout and fire, but it is not secure against the depredations of men. It’s too exposed, too easily uncovered, and after a few precious days of self-indulgence the travelers are obliged once again to move on.
In this impossible land the mother’s choice is clearly the only sane one, and nothing that occurs in the course of the novel up to the death of the father argues against the suicide that, contemplating his gun and his pair of bullets (eventually reduced to one), he repeatedly ponders. And yet in the end he and his author can’t bring themselves to pull the trigger. McCarthy is ensnared and his hell undone by the paradox that lies at the heart of every story of apocalypse. The only true account of the world after a disaster as nearly complete and as searing as the
one McCarthy proposes, drawing heavily on the “nuclear winter” scenario first proposed by Carl Sagan and others, would be a book of blank pages, white as ash. But to annihilate the world in prose one must simultaneously write it into being. Thus even an act of stylistic denial as extreme as McCarthy’s here—the densely foliated sentences of
Suttree
and
Blood Meridian,
teeming with allusion and inhabited by exotic nouns and rare adjectives, are burned away; the chapters and scenes broken down into fragments and rubble—remains, in spite of itself, an affirmation. The paradox of language undoing the death it deals animates every passage of the novel, as in this typical description:
The country went from pine to liveoak and pine. Magnolias. Trees as dead as any. He picked up one of the heavy leaves and crushed it in his hand to powder and let the powder sift through his fingers.
Powder, dead;
sure. But those words “liveoak,” “pine,” the somehow onomatopoeic splendor of “magnolia,” still flower greenly in the mind before McCarthy crushes them, and that leaf, which, if ash, must weigh very little, still lies heavy against the father’s hand.
The paradox in every part and sentence of the post-apocalyptic narrative—evoking even as it denies—is repeated as if fractally by
The Road
as a whole. The son has wearied of his father’s stories of the past, of deeds of heroism and goodness, of the world that no longer exists—“Those stories are not true,” he complains—but he has none of his own to offer. He leads an all but storyless existence in which meaning, motivation, and resolution have no place and nothing to do. And yet of course the only way McCarthy has of laying this tragic state before us is through
storytelling, through craft and incident and a layered, tightly constructed narrative that partakes of the epic virtue it attempts to abnegate.
This paradox, like a brutal syllogism, leads McCarthy, almost, one senses, in spite of himself, to conclude
The Road
on a note of possible redemption that while moving and reassuring is prepared for neither by one’s reading of his prior work nor, perhaps, by the novel itself. In order to destroy the world, it becomes necessary to save it.
3.
All the elements of a science-fiction novel of the post-apocalypse are present or at least hinted at, then, in
The Road:
the urgent naturalism of McCarthy’s description of torched woodland, desiccated human remains, decaying structures, human and natural violence; the ambivalence toward technology embodied in the destructive-redemptive role of fire; the faint inventive echoes of works like Roger Zelazny’s
Damnation Alley
and the
Mad Max
movies in McCarthy’s “bloodcults,” roving gangs of tattooed barbarian cannibals driven by lust and hunger and surviving bits of diesel-powered machinery; and the strong invitation to pardon the exercise as a fable extended by the namelessness of characters and locales, by the vague nature of the disaster that has befallen the world, by the presence of at least one semi-allegorical character, and the usual, inevitable (in McCarthy’s work generally and the genre as a whole) speculation on the presence or absence of God. There are bits of satire of a very dark order in the hints that religious extremism caused this holocaust, and in the relentless way McCarthy deprives the foolish reader of the reassurances—a few precious surviving books, a luxuriant return of wildlife,
a sense of savage freedom, or a necessary cleansing of the old corrupt world—of the strange comfort that post-apocalyptic stories characteristically provide.
The Road
is most profitably read, however, neither as parable nor as science fiction, and fundamentally it marks not a departure from but a return to McCarthy’s most brilliant genre work, combined in a manner we have not seen since
Blood Meridian:
adventure and Gothic horror. That book (also a western, of course, like its three successors) is usually viewed not only as McCarthy’s greatest—a view I passionately share—but as representing a kind of fulcrum, a borderland between the early quartet of Tennessee novels written in the 1960s and 70s (
The Orchard Keeper, Outer Dark, Child of God,
and
Suttree
), which left McCarthy in obscurity, and the Border Trilogy (
All the Pretty Horses, The Crossing,
and
Cities of the Plain
), which brought him fame. In
Blood Meridian
lushness of prose counterbalances aridity of setting; digression and indirection have not yet ceded the narrative to the dictates of the trilogy’s archetypal western plots; and the Gothic impulse vies fiercely with the call to adventure. Setting aside the halfhearted
No Country for Old Men,
as charitably even the lover of McCarthy must,
The Road
seems to work its way back to the rich storytelling borderland of horror and the epic.
It is the adventure story in both its modern and epic forms that structures the narrative. There are strong echoes of the Jack London–style adventure, down to this novel’s thematic emphasis on the imperative to build a fire, in the father’s inherent resourcefulness, in his handiness with tools and guns, his foresight and punctilio, his resolve—you can only call it pluck—in the face of overwhelming natural odds, savage tribesmen, and the despair of solitude. Of course the underlying model for this modern kind of adventure story is
Robinson Crusoe;
and post-apocalyptic tales of
lone survivors, such as George R. Stewart’s classic
Earth Abides,
have long played fruitfully with the pattern of Defoe’s novel, depicting as heroic if problematic a lone attempt to impose a bourgeois social order on an irrational empty wilderness after the Bomb or virus strikes.
The Road
can also be read as an older form of adventure story that became discredited after the advent of Robinson Crusoe, that orderly, bourgeois, house-proud, and anxious hero, but that has haunted the work of McCarthy for years: the epic. Like the earlier duo of John Grady Cole and Billy Parham, the two young ranchers in the Border Trilogy novels,
The Road’s
father and son—the latter’s blond head evoked through conscious Grail imagery as a “golden chalice, good to house a god”—are bound up in a quest narrative, walking (by necessity, horses having become extinct) to find not revenge or justice or love as in those other books but a healing land of warmth and sunlight. There is no such place, we fear, and so, as in
Blood Meridian,
the quest here feels random, empty at its core; but the attitudes toward it of the characters and of the reader are altogether different. Though they and we fear it must end in tragedy and failure, we are rooting for them, pulling for them, from the first—and so, we suspect, is the author.