Post-Apocalyptic Buffet
After nuclear devastation across the globe, the remaining human survivors have congregated in Australia to spend their last months figuring out what to do before radiation poisoning sets in.
The best parts of the story for me were submarine missions a few of the characters embark upon, exploring radiated coastlines for signs of life and investigating the sources of mysterious radio signals in areas that are unfit for life. These were the only elements to truly capitalize on the strength of the post-apocalyptic setting, as the rest of the story involves the mundane everyday lives of the survivors in Australia.
As a whole I found the story entirely disappointing. The characters behave unrealistically and in ways which do not establish heroic qualities. When confronted with the possibility that everyone will die in a few months, one family sets about planting a garden they could never live to enjoy. Another fixes up cars and races them. The characters suffer from a collective denial of their fate. But instead of exploring their options and fighting for survival, they resign themselves to their fate and continue planting gardens, racing cars, etc.
This lack of action, and initiative, completely destroys the conflict in the story. How can you have conflict if the characters ignore the conflict? And the conflict is, I might add, one of the natural resources of the post-apocalyptic genre; Humans in conflict with their environment.
On The Beach may make a beautiful tragedy, and a work of art in that regard. But as a post-apocalyptic genre story, and a piece of fictive entertainment, it completely fails for having no heroes and no conflict.
A father and son travel south to avoid cold temperatures brought on by a cataclysm which has destroyed the planet and left humanity on the brink of extinction. They follow a main road south, along the way searching for food and avoiding roving bands of cannibals.
I found it to be a really good story, and played the survival elements very well in ways that On The Beach didn’t. The father and son are at many times on the verge of starving, and their search of abandoned houses or destroyed towns often turns up little, and sometimes exposes them to the danger of cannibals. This is a natural conflict brought on by the post-apocalyptic setting, and Cormac McCarthy uses the setting to full effect.
As far as weaknesses, I would agree with Crawford Killian’s review. It’s a bit odd that there isn’t more social organization, and that the world, as far as the story is concerned, is boiled down to cannibals and lone surviving individuals. You would think that somebody, somewhere, is working together and although this is briefly mentioned a few times in the story, the reader is never given a glimpse of that aspect of McCarthy’s world.
The interaction of father and child is not only an interesting from a character standpoint, but is expertly used by McCarthy as a writer’s trick to consistently explain the state of the world and its inhabitants within the story.
The road itself, in addition to being the title of the story and almost another character in the plot, also serves as excellent symbolism of life journey and the paths we must all choose to face.
The Road is a great story of perseverence, and a prime example of masterful storytelling.
4 comments
Trackbacks/Pings
Leave a reply


Comments
April 5th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
I personally didn’t like The Road. The writing was shoddy and the plot was so simple that a 10 year old could easily think up a better one. It seemed to me that it was just a well established author making a few extra bucks by putting together a quick, easy read. It didn’t bring anything new to the Post-Apocalyptic genre.
April 5th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Re: Simplicity of plot and prose:
The story is kept simple even down to the prose used to tell the story is all an intentional choice. I think it’s wrong to interpret that as a ‘mistake’ on the part of the author.
There are only two main charactrs (father and son) – McCarthy wanted to focus on them exclusively, and that forces a simplicity upon the plot. You couldn’t introduce many other plot threads without introducing a much larger cast of characters.
And the simplicity of the prose reflects the simplicity of the story itself, and the decline of reading & writing in the society.
I see all of it as intentional. You don’t have to like McCarthy’s choice to do that, but I think it would be a mistake to assume he did all that accidentally or out of laziness.
I think it requires a fair amount of discipline to keep things that simple. The natural urge for a writer or creative person is to evolve everything to be complex.
That’s just my take on the simplicity thing…
April 7th, 2007 at 1:08 am
Hey E,
Sounds like an interesting read. I’ll trade you. I found a copy of “Guns of the south” by Harry Turtledove. I’ve been meaning to send it to you.
- C
April 25th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
Thank You