Scan barcode
A review by cronopista
The Passenger by Cormac McCarthy
1.0
Cormac McCarthy is that nerdy kid who thinks that he´ll look very tough if he swears a lot. And boy, does he want you to believe that he's seen it all: madness and war and loss and physics and philosophy and cars and sex and guns. Except, of course, he hasn't. He seems to believe that madness consists in "seeing things", all of them random and unconnected to the life of the sufferer (the hallucinations that two of the characters experience never give us one iota of information about them, and don't seem to serve any narrative purpose); of war, he takes the self-mythologizing of combatants at face value; of physics and philosophy he's only learnt the art of dropping names and quoting quotes without providing the slightest insight, simply signaling that he MAY have read the books; and as for his experience of "life", it seems to be mostly entrenched in the increasingly obsolete gender roles of the past. Manly men who are basically full of shit and invisible women. To sum up, McCarthy has plenty of data, but no knowledge to impart. Beware of the world-weary: it's ALWAYS a pose.
Merged review:
Cormac McCarthy is that nerdy kid who thinks that he´ll look very tough if he swears a lot. And boy, does he want you to believe that he's seen it all: madness and war and loss and physics and philosophy and cars and sex and guns. Except, of course, he hasn't. He seems to believe that madness consists in "seeing things", all of them random and unconnected to the life of the sufferer (the hallucinations that two of the characters experience never give us one iota of information about them, and don't seem to serve any narrative purpose); of war, he takes the self-mythologizing of combatants at face value; of physics and philosophy he's only learnt the art of dropping names and quoting quotes without providing the slightest insight, simply signaling that he MAY have read the books; and as for his experience of "life", it seems to be mostly entrenched in the increasingly obsolete gender roles of the past. Manly men who are basically full of shit and invisible women. To sum up, McCarthy has plenty of data, but no knowledge to impart. Beware of the world-weary: it's ALWAYS a pose.
Merged review:
Cormac McCarthy is that nerdy kid who thinks that he´ll look very tough if he swears a lot. And boy, does he want you to believe that he's seen it all: madness and war and loss and physics and philosophy and cars and sex and guns. Except, of course, he hasn't. He seems to believe that madness consists in "seeing things", all of them random and unconnected to the life of the sufferer (the hallucinations that two of the characters experience never give us one iota of information about them, and don't seem to serve any narrative purpose); of war, he takes the self-mythologizing of combatants at face value; of physics and philosophy he's only learnt the art of dropping names and quoting quotes without providing the slightest insight, simply signaling that he MAY have read the books; and as for his experience of "life", it seems to be mostly entrenched in the increasingly obsolete gender roles of the past. Manly men who are basically full of shit and invisible women. To sum up, McCarthy has plenty of data, but no knowledge to impart. Beware of the world-weary: it's ALWAYS a pose.
Merged review:
Cormac McCarthy is that nerdy kid who thinks that he´ll look very tough if he swears a lot. And boy, does he want you to believe that he's seen it all: madness and war and loss and physics and philosophy and cars and sex and guns. Except, of course, he hasn't. He seems to believe that madness consists in "seeing things", all of them random and unconnected to the life of the sufferer (the hallucinations that two of the characters experience never give us one iota of information about them, and don't seem to serve any narrative purpose); of war, he takes the self-mythologizing of combatants at face value; of physics and philosophy he's only learnt the art of dropping names and quoting quotes without providing the slightest insight, simply signaling that he MAY have read the books; and as for his experience of "life", it seems to be mostly entrenched in the increasingly obsolete gender roles of the past. Manly men who are basically full of shit and invisible women. To sum up, McCarthy has plenty of data, but no knowledge to impart. Beware of the world-weary: it's ALWAYS a pose.
Merged review:
Cormac McCarthy is that nerdy kid who thinks that he´ll look very tough if he swears a lot. And boy, does he want you to believe that he's seen it all: madness and war and loss and physics and philosophy and cars and sex and guns. Except, of course, he hasn't. He seems to believe that madness consists in "seeing things", all of them random and unconnected to the life of the sufferer (the hallucinations that two of the characters experience never give us one iota of information about them, and don't seem to serve any narrative purpose); of war, he takes the self-mythologizing of combatants at face value; of physics and philosophy he's only learnt the art of dropping names and quoting quotes without providing the slightest insight, simply signaling that he MAY have read the books; and as for his experience of "life", it seems to be mostly entrenched in the increasingly obsolete gender roles of the past. Manly men who are basically full of shit and invisible women. To sum up, McCarthy has plenty of data, but no knowledge to impart. Beware of the world-weary: it's ALWAYS a pose.