Comment by phendrenad2
1 year ago
I have a theory that everyone has a different level of detachment vs self-insertion when consuming a fictional narrative. Those more self-insertive probably shouldn't read his books.
1 year ago
I have a theory that everyone has a different level of detachment vs self-insertion when consuming a fictional narrative. Those more self-insertive probably shouldn't read his books.
I think its just a simple matter of aesthetics. Some people find violence ugly, and don't like looking at it. Some people think that by looking at it you're somehow coming to a greater understanding of the world or something. Maybe that is the case for some super sheltered individuals, but I doubt it's the case on the whole.
If anyone has any ideas on what the point of violence in art is, I'm open to hearing it. Obviously horror is a genre and so is gore, and people seem to enjoy being shocked. I don't think that is what McCarthy was going for though. And he wasn't going for the vengeance-catharsis angle like Tarantino either.
It's a media literacy issue. It's good to read challenging works to grow your understanding. I think the self-insertive tendency comes from consuming works oriented toward it with typical hero/villain structures
Don't really think so. I love Pynchon and there's not really a character I'm latching onto when I read that. McCarthy and Pynchon both fetishize a sort of violence. I find McCarthy's writing going there many times for shock value or aesthetic reasons and it makes me take him less seriously. Other people have mentioned Tarantino and I think that is apt.