Language is the Main Character - The Orchard Keeper Cormac McCarthy

 

The Orchard Keeper, Cormac McCarthy’s first novel, is more than just a taste of what will come later in his writing career (although there is certainly that element in the novel).  Mainly, the novel features his extremely distinctive prose.  His weird, twisted diction, mixed with Kentucky dialect and strange extinct words brought back to life on the page.

 

The plot of The Orchard Keeper is hard to follow.  Characters are sometimes not named, and the reader must decipher who is speaking and where and when the action is occurring.  There are several events happening nearly together, and they are tied at the end in a not completely satisfactory way.

The real showcase of this novel is the use of language.  McCarthy shows here that he is not afraid to use language to fit the needs of his art, sometimes nearly twisting it to be breaking point.

Outer Dark: the Young Cormac McCarthy

When you read early novels of a great writer, it is easy to say that you can see what that writer would later become. How he or she would hone away the difficult parts that don't seem to fit, and get at that rock hard layer that would make him or her a great writer.

This is the case with bad writers too. You can often see, in their first work or two, the element or element(s) that will derail them. Maybe it is a slavish devotion to a theme that is not totally mastered. Perhaps an ideological stance or a dedication to a particular narrative form. After a novel or two, the lack of range becomes the wall. The writer can't climb it, and that is it.

Cormac McCarthy's early novel, Outer Dark, shows all the elements of a writer on his way up; reading it, and seeing how he pared away the dead weight and got at the issues that matter illustrate later on illustrate how a novelist can go from Outer Dark, a decent novel about incest, murder, poverty and cruelty, and transform those issues into something distinctly American and even universal in works like Sutree and Blood Meridian.

So Outer Dark should be read even though it is unsatisfying in many ways, especially the ending. There is the feeling the McCarthy is trying to get himself out of a box that he has constructed throughout the novel, and the quickest way is just to punch a hole at the bottom. I suggest reading some of his great, more mature works, and then reading this novel. Then you can see the process of great art getting honed over time. You can see a writer listening to his own inner voice, getting at the heart of the matter that matters most to him as an artist.

Problems with Plot: No Country For Old Men

Cormac McCarthy’s No Country For Old Men certainly doesn’t let the reader down in several crucial areas of novel construction. Tone, setting, character, are impeccably drawn.  McCarthy has a unique way of situating his characters in a time and place, so much so that pulling them out of it would not only be absurd, but stupid.  Sheriff Bell’s soliloquies are an excellent example.  From them, the novel gets much of its moral,temporal and local tone.  Sheriff Bell gets to comment on the general action, providing a mooring frame for the reader.  It really couldn’t have been done any better.

If the novel slips anywhere, it is on the level of plot, and to a lesser degree, character motivation.  Why do the bodies of the drug dealers stay so long out in the desert, and why must be return to them three times?  Why does Carson Wells essentially hand himself over to Chigurh?  Why does the novel turn away from Moss’ killing, smothering it in remembrances and the chatter of other characters? 

These are small flaws, perhaps, but they do mar this novel.  They prevent No Country from Old Men from being a great novel; they knock it down a peg to the ranks of the very good novel.