No Country for Old Men: The gripping western thriller adapted into the Oscar-winning Best Picture film: 26 (Picador Collection, 26)

I have read many novels by Cormac McCarthy and this is the latest, after a gap of a few years since reading 'The Road'. This novel is a relatively recent work and is probably better known in it's cinematic version, adapted by the marvellous Coen brothers, which was rightly garnered with all the top Oscars in 2008 and which I saw before reading the book. This excellent novel sits in the comparatively short section of McCarthy's works, (unusually) has several clearly defined sub-plots and will be far more 'accessible' to most as whilst it has the core identifiable characteristics of McCarthy's writing style, it largely omits the use of lengthy sections of foreign language and unpunctuated sentences for which he is 'better known' in earlier works. I read this book after seeing the fantastic film 'version' (and I use that term entirely intentionally) and was struck with how markedly the tone of each differed - there is a huge opportunity to be 'distracted' by the compelling action which occurs in the story (and which, necessarily, drives the film presentation) and hence miss what I believe is the true plot behind McCarthy's prose. This difference is perfectly demonstrated when you read the (intentionally vague) story introduction printed on the back of the book and quoted in the Amazon description, repeated below : "Llewelyn Moss, hunting antelope near the Rio Grande, stumbles upon a transaction gone horribly wrong. Finding bullet-ridden bodies, several kilos of heroin, and a caseload of cash, he faces a choice - leave the scene as he found it, or cut the money and run. Choosing the latter, he knows, will change everything. And so begins a terrifying chain of events, in which each participant seems determined to answer the question that one asks another: how does a man decide in what order to abandon his life ?" It emphasises my point since it omits any mention of who I believe are the true main characters of this tale : the 'hitman' (Anton Chigurh) and Sheriff (Tom Bell) 'pursuers', with the latter being the less colourful but actually more 'dominant' of the two; this story nevertheless does have 3 important threads.... And I think my point is proven since we are first presented with some musings of an as yet unknown character, THEN introduced to the soon-to-be pursuer Chigurh - as he deals with the aftermath of his handiwork which then get Moss involved (so it is he that is actually introduced last of the 3). So, those first few pages already show us perfectly how things are on different levels, since the book is partly written in firsthand, italicised, chapters to give us the thoughts of Sheriff Bell (who is that initially unknown character) but also/predominantly in thirdhand, as events are described to us and we are let into the minds of Moss and the eventual pursuer (a VERY unpleasant place to go !); but crucially the thoughts of Moss are stated to us, whereas we can only learn about whatever thoughts the enigmatic/ruthless/weird pursuer might have through his verbal exchanges with others..... This story is clearly actually about the Sheriff, with the hugely dominant plot being something of a MacGuffin - the weighty sections of the book are given over to Bell airing his thoughts to us. So, I believe that this work has to be considered in terms of both 'what happens' (emphasised in the film) AND 'what is it about' (emphasised in the book), as the answers to those 2 questions are quite different. Both are hugely compelling and, largely, attractive considerations as much of what occurs is so gripping and the 3 main personalities so incredibly intriguing. You will try and sympathise/understand the Sheriff, root for Moss and (certainly in my case) be completely, totally and utterly captivated by the chilling nature of the odious Chigurh as each follows their path through that 'MacGuffin' series of events. It is easy to see why the Coens snapped-up the opportunity to adapt this literary masterpiece for the screen. The contrast in presentation 'emphasis' is understandable, since the film would be rather droll for many if it contained ALL the musings of Sheriff Bell which feature so prominently in the book. The reason I have included so many references to the film is not just that I don't want to reveal too much about this superb overall story written by McCarthy to spoil things for you. It's also because if you enjoy this book as much as I did, and are similarly captivated by some of the most intriguing characters you will ever read about, then experiencing them in the superb film portrayals will enhance your experience all the more.

No Country for Old Men is a philosophical thriller written with imagination, passion and intellectual acuity rarely found in modern thrillers. It's everything you could wish for in a book; a fast paced plot, fascinating characters and deep themes that give you something to chew on. It begins with a drug deal gone wrong; a regular guy making the wrong decisions, and the bad guy whose decisions are linked with fate, who is hired to kill him. No Country explores the differences/similarities of Chance versus Choices in a world where a man's life rests on the toss of a coin and the decision to do the right thing leaves another man regretting his actions. It's a violent book because it is about violence. How violence isn't new and it will always exist, as explored further in McCarthy's The Road amongst others. Presiding over the mayhem is the local voice of the Sheriff, and you can't help but hear the melodic southern tones of Tommy Lee Jones when reading these passages. Sheriff Bell, along with the psychopathic Chigurh, offers deep insights into the nature of violence and man's choices which leaves you feeling you should really re-read this book sometime. There is a lot to think about. McCarthy's complete disregard for speech marks gives his narrative a stark realism and paradoxically adds an authentic voice to the dialogue, however, it can get confusing when labouring through pages of dialogue between two people - he makes you concentrate but maybe this is his aim? Never before have I read a sentence which contains the word "and" a dozen or more times and been blown away by the beauty of the prose. The repetition of these key words creates a lilting melody to the prose and amplifies McCarthy's descriptive imagery. It is truly amazing. So, a fast paced bloody thriller with a soul - recommended to anyone who likes to think a little aswell as be entertained.

The novel is structured around an extended chase which is triggered by the accidental acquisition of a large sum of drug money by Moss, one of the central characters. Moss is pursued by two hired gunmen - Chigurgh & Wells - & a careworn sheriff - Bell. The narrative is punctuated by the thoughts of the sheriff, as he tries to come to turns with his growing doubts about the validity of the moral code which has governed his life. Bell & Chigurth represent the polarities of good & evil. Moss is a cypher for "everyman" - a normal, good-natured guy who is suddenly presented with limitless possibilities & their accompanying dangers. The story is told in a stylised, spare prose. Character dialogue is often repetitive - presumably, characteristic of the dialogue of south Texan people - but every word is significant. McCarthy is deeply concerned by what he sees as the ending of a way of life. Violence & greed undermine & corrode the morality of the "old West". There is a funereal tone to much of the novel. It can be seen as a straightforward struggle between good & bad, & it is also possible to interpret the chase as a metaphor for the corruption & death brought about by drugs, greed & "big money". I rate it as a classic for several reasons. Despite it's spare prose & laconic dialogue, it manages to address important themes in a clear & concise manner. It's characters are memorable. It evokes a sense of place. And it is a damn good read as well......

I read the book once-not carefully - and knew I didn't get it. Then I read it again with some care; and when I put it down that second time it bothered me that I still didn't know what the book was really about. Then I saw the movie and it cleared up a lot of it; but there were still things I didn't understand - locations, time lines, identities., who if anyone has the money at the end of the book Above all you need a map of West Texas to follow the story; and you need to consult it often. And now I have gone back once again to clear some things up and think about what McCarthy was really trying to say, if anything. And I'm still not sure. But I need to get this review off my mind. So to the extent that McCarthy was writing for a knowing audience the book is a flop. To the extent that once again McCarthy was showing off his superb writing skills - particularly his ability to give us a dystopian story, to write doom drenched fiction it was a success. Would I read it again? Probably. Would I recommend it to you? Depends. About McCarthy as a writer: No one writing today can say so much or describe so much on one page as McCarthy - and in words of few syllables. Nor can anyone writing today bring the reader into the picture as well as McCarthy nor sketch a character as well nor write conversation so well that you can almost hear the Texas twang, the rural patois of a good old boy Texas lawman. Read a page of McCarthy describing Llewellyn Moss's first view of the scene of four burned shot-up trucks surrounded by three dead bodies and one wounded man in the Texas desert and you are right there. Listen to Sheriff Ed Tom Bell talk to his uncle Ellis and you are in the room with them. I just wish he would be clearer. Was this a requiem for the good old days in West Texas? Was it a tribute to the men of that time? Was it a study of evil? (Frankly I have the same questions in respect to his fascination with evil in the only other McCarthy books I have read - The Road and Blood Horizon ) Was sit a Jeremiad against the hippie generation? The narcotics trade? Or was it just a good story interspersed with a lot of philosophy, giving Melville a run for his money? I guess it was all of these things. But I wish now that, having put the book down, I really knew what he was trying to tell me. The obvious story is fairly clear; Moss finds the trucks and the men in the Texas desert just this side of the border. Everyone is dead except the wounded man asking for water. (Moss has none.) One of the trucks is loaded with bricks of cocaine. There is a man lying dead by a briefcase under a tree. The briefcase holds 2.3 million in hundred dollar bills. Moss takes it. He returns that night with water, but the man has been shot and the cocaine is gone. He realizes too late that he may not be alone, all terrain four wheelers with lights are in the vicinity and he is spotted. He runs. And a lot of the rest of the narrative is the chase. Obviously two sides have been cheated - one of the drugs, one of the money - and both are out to find Moss and the money. The principle agent of the chase is a psychopathic killer with almost supernatural powers - Anton Chigurth who, armed with a compressed air bottle connected to a cattle stun gun and a sawed off shotgun, manages in two hundred blood stained pages to kill Moss, his wife, his mother in law, a deputy, an innocent citizen, two or three hotel clerks, the business man behind the drug dealing - all in separate killings - and then three Mexicans in a gun fight all together; and if you can tell me after reading this book how Chigurth managed to find all these people (even though a transponder was hidden in the cash and accounts for his presence in at lest one of he killings) I'll buy you a good dinner at a place of your choice. McCarthy, being the man he thinks he is, doesn't have to explain. Chigurth just appears And there is no denouement, no satisfaction, no justice, no catharsis Though injured Chigurth just walks away out of the pages. Evil, points out McCarthy, is still out there - and always will be. That's the narrative; but it's not the story. The story is that West Texas has changed so much since the end of World War II to 1980 (the period in which the narrative is set) that it is no longer a country for old men; and that is lamentable. Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, a man who is sure to steal your heart, tells the story in his own words, about how things are now, how things were then, what men should be like, about his opinions on life in first person italicized ruminations which begin and end the book and which are often interspersed into the narrative. They are the guts of what McCarthy has to say about life; and they are worth reading. The rest of the stuff is just well written bloody crime stuff. You'll love Ed Tom and adore his wife Lorraine who, though unready, cheerfully goes into retirement with Ed Tom who, after thirty-five years of being a sheriff. finds it is no country for old men. JBP - December 2007

Un par de cineastas tan geniales como los hermanos Coen no pudieron encontrar cómo mejorar la narrativa y grabaron la adaptación casi cuadro por cuadro, con el diálogo casi sin alterar, eso habla mucho de la calidad de éste libro.

Como todo lo.d Mccarthy, una joya. Esta vez con una prosa simple y diáfana. Lo más intenso, sus últimas líneas. Maravilla.

Pour les cours. Au top

Cormac McCarthy è forse uno dei più grandi scrittori viventi! Da Premio Nobel per la letteratura!