The scariest thing about our human predicament is that scientific progress has placed world-ending technologies into the hands of a species that is still just a rung above barbarian apes. Holden seems to embody this dichotomy in a single character. We are both fascinated and terrified that someone could be articulate, learned, skilled, and yet rape, torture, and kill with glee. He is both the nuclear warhead, and the bloodthirsty primate poking at the button. I think it’s likely that McCarthy saw Holden as not one or the other, but a symbol of the awful fact that we contain both. To paraphrase Ernest Becker, we are gods who shit. Trying to square those opposites is an existential mindfuck and the horrifying nature of the character is amplified by exemplifying the extremes of each of these two poles.
My own personal belief is that McCarthy wasn't using characters like Holden or Chigurh to attack scientific materialism so much as he used them as a means to probe and explore the dark corners of that philosophy. It seems to me that he leans that way in his own thinking but set up these characters as antagonists as a sort of check against himself. He recognized the destructive capabilities of such a worldview and writing characters like this probably allowed him to occupy a tension between what he felt was right (his own moral leanings) and what he thought was true (his view of how the world works.)
Off-topic, but in regard to scientific materialism, I also believe that the epilogue of BM actually describes (scientific progress) I had sent you the message below on IG but got an error mark :S I am curious what you think about my theory:
I am a writer from Slovenia (so sorry for my imperfect English) and I have recently read Blood Meridian and watched some videos made by you about the book. I think I have an alternative explanation about what the Epilogue of the novel actually tries to convey to the reader: I believe it is simply a description of a (scientific) progress. The man making holes in the ground is simply destiny or fate. He is kindling fire from rocks. This represents progress. All progress derives from nature, i.e. from »rocks« that God put there (eg. Computers are made from natural elements, as are all other things in this world, and natural elements were made in this world by »god«). The fire means that another stage of progress has been kindled, but can also simbolize the destructive side of progress – think of atomic bomb for example, or, if we look at BM, the »invention« of gunpowder by Judge Holden is progress and this progress is used for killing and conquering and for realising so-called manifest destiny. So, this is the direct link between destiny and progress: progress is destined to mankind, however, it is also bloody. The holes run to the rim of visible ground, i.e. progress is unlimited, is never ending. The meaning of »seems less the pursuit of some continuance than the verification of a principle, a validation of sequence and causality as if each round and perfect hole owed its existence to the one before it there on that prairie« simply means that progress builds on itself, subsequent scientific advancements are a product of previous advancements. Wanderers are mankind. They move like mechanisms, which means that (scientific) progress dictates their behavior, this dictate comes from destiny of progress and not from within themselves, and progress is a mechanism by which they move forward, by which the society moves forward and changes its form. Those who search for bones are those who are interested in history, i.e. the historical consequences of progress, even the »bad«, negative ones, and those who do not search for bones are not interested in such history but simply follow wherever progress leads them. Why does a handle of a man (destiny) have two handles: one handle is good, other is evil, both good and evil are produced by progress. Mccarthy even plainly says that epilogue is about progress, i.e. wanderers »progress one by one that track of holes :)« Also, if I understand correctly, Mccarthy was very interested in science. Also, since epilogue should be mirrored in prologue, let's look at the three citations: The first one is explained here: https://www.reddit.com/r/cormacmccarthy/comments/z9r35m/paul_valery_wisdom_of_the_orient_blood_meridian/ I first thought it might represent religion as an antithesis to science, but it could also mean that progress as such is not a guarantee for stability and order (as shown in Blood Meridian as a whole, where progress drives chaos, war and killing). The second, about life in darkness, means that even if one does not »search for bones« i.e. is not knowledgeable, does not know history, such a person's life is still not in vain, is not miserable, can be a good and fulfilling life. "Good", fulfilling life is not dependent on the level of knowledge or scientific progress a person or a society achieves. The third quote means that no matter how much progress we make and how much knowledge of history of that progress we obtain, history will repeat itself :) I hope this all makes sense, I would like to know what you think of my pet theory :D
You’ve got some great ideas here, but I’m not sure it does make sense yet, in the whole. I maybe need some more clarity on what you actually mean by progress. You seem to be focused on moral progress combined with technological progress, but you haven’t mined the foundation of progress, which is time.
You are touching on this concept of time with your reference to “destiny”, and maybe also with your notion of “god”. That our destiny is to move through time attempting to become god— to make a machine that transcends nature, so transcends death and time, and become a god incarnate. Tell me if I’m off on a tangent from you now.
Maybe the price we pay for “progress” is somewhat Promethean. We are sentenced to time and death and a fallen state of being.
It does seem however, that there is an open offer hanging over the head of every human— The ability to bargain with time. It seems plausible to us that rules of life we perceive on Earth are self-imposed, or at least, are not strictly enforced. Perhaps through an abuse of life’s mechanics we can finally achieve the transcendence over time and place— this idea being the very core of our ambition and vanity.
I’m just riffing with you here. Trying to distil some of your thoughts into my own language. Let me know what you think.
So, first of all, I am looking at this from "un-American" point of view, meaning as someone outside American ideology/tradition so maybe my iterpretation seems to be a bit exotic? Also, I gave it some more thought. Here's what i think:
I believe Mccarthy once said that if a writer is not writing about life and death, the story is not important or sth like that. I think that the Blood Meridian as an anti-western tries to answer the question why did all the atrocities that are so painfully described in a novel happen, what brings such occurrences. I believe that his answer is scientific/technological progress, and then he poses himself a question, why does this progress happen, i.e. who is "guilty" for all the atrocities, i.e. war that come from progress. And in epilogue, he says that the progress is destined to mankind, we cannot escape it. I believe this is its whole argument.
Then, in prologue, he warns us about this progress. In the first quote, he says to us that progress will not bring us serenity, inner peace, justice, courage .... i.e. positive values. The second says that a man who does not chase progress does not live it's life in vain (darkness here is meant as an anti-progres). The third warns us that no matter the level of progress we achieve, history will repeat itself. So it is a warning to us that progress will not save mankind's troubles. So mankind is in a bind here - we want to progress, destiny drives us to technologically progress, because with it, we will improve our lives, however, progress also brings war and destruction and will, as such, not make us happy.
By progress I mean strictly technological progress. Gunpowder enabled the whites to defeat the indians, that is also well represented in the novel (guns VS arrows, killing of Yumas with a canon, Judge saves itself by wielding a cannon ...)
Also, I gave some more thought about the "fire" in the epilogue. I believe that fire represents progress because it is a Promethean theme, and it illuminates the darkness in the holes (that means it brings knowledge) but also, what Mccarthy wants to point out here is perhaps that progress is actually forged in warfare. If you think about it, scientific breakthroughs come from wars, from conflict (think nuclear fission, internet which was invented by military etc ...) So there is a connection between progress and destruction, destruction and fear of destruction drives progress which then causes destruction - circular, never ending movement. So, the message of the whole novel is fatalistic: we will always strive for progress, this drive comes from nature, because we want to conquer nature (and other peoples who are notin our own "tribe", but they are also nature, as are we all) in order to survive. But this quest for survival which is fought through technological progress also causes conflict, i.e. war. IRL the main goal of american military is to be technologically the most advanced military in the world at any cost, because this is the best way to ensure survival of american nation.
Does it make more sense now?
Also, one more thing, I believe that Judge Holden also represents this inevitability of progress through warfare. Here's why: obviously, Holden is a man of science, knows basically everything, wants to understand and then subdue nature (as does the mankind) and is a warrior. One of the central themes of BM is scalping. Scalping is a form of (violent) domination of someone. You cannot scalp the judge because he has no hair whatsoever. So, you cannot dominate this progress through warfare in any way, it dominates us as a human race, it drives us it shapes our destinies. That is why, after all, conquering of the West was also apologised by "manifest destiny." Pretty bleak, now that I think of it :)
As regards the time and sentence to death, I believe that this is irrelevant: progress will happen in "due" time, the point is that it will happen. However, coming back to the judge: in BM it is stated that everybody has met him and that he will never die. What does that mean? I believe it means that everybody has this wish for security which comes from technological progress in warfare because it ensures oneself that he is capable to defend itself, to survive. But, if you lean too much into it, like Glanton gang leaned into Judge, then this will be your undoing. You will become crazed with power and destruction and in the end this will be your undoing, as it was the undoing of the gang, including the kid. And afterwards, Judge is fiddling and dancing again, singing his "siren song" to new, potential "customers of his services." It is a warning to humanity, also relevant for our tie e.g. lean to much into nuclear deterrent and reap the consequences, which will now be catastrophic. In other words, live by the sword, die by the sword.
The scariest thing about our human predicament is that scientific progress has placed world-ending technologies into the hands of a species that is still just a rung above barbarian apes. Holden seems to embody this dichotomy in a single character. We are both fascinated and terrified that someone could be articulate, learned, skilled, and yet rape, torture, and kill with glee. He is both the nuclear warhead, and the bloodthirsty primate poking at the button. I think it’s likely that McCarthy saw Holden as not one or the other, but a symbol of the awful fact that we contain both. To paraphrase Ernest Becker, we are gods who shit. Trying to square those opposites is an existential mindfuck and the horrifying nature of the character is amplified by exemplifying the extremes of each of these two poles.
Wow! Great thoughts. This is why I made this Substack!
My own personal belief is that McCarthy wasn't using characters like Holden or Chigurh to attack scientific materialism so much as he used them as a means to probe and explore the dark corners of that philosophy. It seems to me that he leans that way in his own thinking but set up these characters as antagonists as a sort of check against himself. He recognized the destructive capabilities of such a worldview and writing characters like this probably allowed him to occupy a tension between what he felt was right (his own moral leanings) and what he thought was true (his view of how the world works.)
Beautiful comment. I liked the idea of him using he characters as a way to check himself. Haven't really thought of that!
Dear Write Conscious,
Off-topic, but in regard to scientific materialism, I also believe that the epilogue of BM actually describes (scientific progress) I had sent you the message below on IG but got an error mark :S I am curious what you think about my theory:
I am a writer from Slovenia (so sorry for my imperfect English) and I have recently read Blood Meridian and watched some videos made by you about the book. I think I have an alternative explanation about what the Epilogue of the novel actually tries to convey to the reader: I believe it is simply a description of a (scientific) progress. The man making holes in the ground is simply destiny or fate. He is kindling fire from rocks. This represents progress. All progress derives from nature, i.e. from »rocks« that God put there (eg. Computers are made from natural elements, as are all other things in this world, and natural elements were made in this world by »god«). The fire means that another stage of progress has been kindled, but can also simbolize the destructive side of progress – think of atomic bomb for example, or, if we look at BM, the »invention« of gunpowder by Judge Holden is progress and this progress is used for killing and conquering and for realising so-called manifest destiny. So, this is the direct link between destiny and progress: progress is destined to mankind, however, it is also bloody. The holes run to the rim of visible ground, i.e. progress is unlimited, is never ending. The meaning of »seems less the pursuit of some continuance than the verification of a principle, a validation of sequence and causality as if each round and perfect hole owed its existence to the one before it there on that prairie« simply means that progress builds on itself, subsequent scientific advancements are a product of previous advancements. Wanderers are mankind. They move like mechanisms, which means that (scientific) progress dictates their behavior, this dictate comes from destiny of progress and not from within themselves, and progress is a mechanism by which they move forward, by which the society moves forward and changes its form. Those who search for bones are those who are interested in history, i.e. the historical consequences of progress, even the »bad«, negative ones, and those who do not search for bones are not interested in such history but simply follow wherever progress leads them. Why does a handle of a man (destiny) have two handles: one handle is good, other is evil, both good and evil are produced by progress. Mccarthy even plainly says that epilogue is about progress, i.e. wanderers »progress one by one that track of holes :)« Also, if I understand correctly, Mccarthy was very interested in science. Also, since epilogue should be mirrored in prologue, let's look at the three citations: The first one is explained here: https://www.reddit.com/r/cormacmccarthy/comments/z9r35m/paul_valery_wisdom_of_the_orient_blood_meridian/ I first thought it might represent religion as an antithesis to science, but it could also mean that progress as such is not a guarantee for stability and order (as shown in Blood Meridian as a whole, where progress drives chaos, war and killing). The second, about life in darkness, means that even if one does not »search for bones« i.e. is not knowledgeable, does not know history, such a person's life is still not in vain, is not miserable, can be a good and fulfilling life. "Good", fulfilling life is not dependent on the level of knowledge or scientific progress a person or a society achieves. The third quote means that no matter how much progress we make and how much knowledge of history of that progress we obtain, history will repeat itself :) I hope this all makes sense, I would like to know what you think of my pet theory :D
You’ve got some great ideas here, but I’m not sure it does make sense yet, in the whole. I maybe need some more clarity on what you actually mean by progress. You seem to be focused on moral progress combined with technological progress, but you haven’t mined the foundation of progress, which is time.
You are touching on this concept of time with your reference to “destiny”, and maybe also with your notion of “god”. That our destiny is to move through time attempting to become god— to make a machine that transcends nature, so transcends death and time, and become a god incarnate. Tell me if I’m off on a tangent from you now.
Maybe the price we pay for “progress” is somewhat Promethean. We are sentenced to time and death and a fallen state of being.
It does seem however, that there is an open offer hanging over the head of every human— The ability to bargain with time. It seems plausible to us that rules of life we perceive on Earth are self-imposed, or at least, are not strictly enforced. Perhaps through an abuse of life’s mechanics we can finally achieve the transcendence over time and place— this idea being the very core of our ambition and vanity.
I’m just riffing with you here. Trying to distil some of your thoughts into my own language. Let me know what you think.
Thanks a lot for your reply.
So, first of all, I am looking at this from "un-American" point of view, meaning as someone outside American ideology/tradition so maybe my iterpretation seems to be a bit exotic? Also, I gave it some more thought. Here's what i think:
I believe Mccarthy once said that if a writer is not writing about life and death, the story is not important or sth like that. I think that the Blood Meridian as an anti-western tries to answer the question why did all the atrocities that are so painfully described in a novel happen, what brings such occurrences. I believe that his answer is scientific/technological progress, and then he poses himself a question, why does this progress happen, i.e. who is "guilty" for all the atrocities, i.e. war that come from progress. And in epilogue, he says that the progress is destined to mankind, we cannot escape it. I believe this is its whole argument.
Then, in prologue, he warns us about this progress. In the first quote, he says to us that progress will not bring us serenity, inner peace, justice, courage .... i.e. positive values. The second says that a man who does not chase progress does not live it's life in vain (darkness here is meant as an anti-progres). The third warns us that no matter the level of progress we achieve, history will repeat itself. So it is a warning to us that progress will not save mankind's troubles. So mankind is in a bind here - we want to progress, destiny drives us to technologically progress, because with it, we will improve our lives, however, progress also brings war and destruction and will, as such, not make us happy.
By progress I mean strictly technological progress. Gunpowder enabled the whites to defeat the indians, that is also well represented in the novel (guns VS arrows, killing of Yumas with a canon, Judge saves itself by wielding a cannon ...)
Also, I gave some more thought about the "fire" in the epilogue. I believe that fire represents progress because it is a Promethean theme, and it illuminates the darkness in the holes (that means it brings knowledge) but also, what Mccarthy wants to point out here is perhaps that progress is actually forged in warfare. If you think about it, scientific breakthroughs come from wars, from conflict (think nuclear fission, internet which was invented by military etc ...) So there is a connection between progress and destruction, destruction and fear of destruction drives progress which then causes destruction - circular, never ending movement. So, the message of the whole novel is fatalistic: we will always strive for progress, this drive comes from nature, because we want to conquer nature (and other peoples who are notin our own "tribe", but they are also nature, as are we all) in order to survive. But this quest for survival which is fought through technological progress also causes conflict, i.e. war. IRL the main goal of american military is to be technologically the most advanced military in the world at any cost, because this is the best way to ensure survival of american nation.
Does it make more sense now?
Also, one more thing, I believe that Judge Holden also represents this inevitability of progress through warfare. Here's why: obviously, Holden is a man of science, knows basically everything, wants to understand and then subdue nature (as does the mankind) and is a warrior. One of the central themes of BM is scalping. Scalping is a form of (violent) domination of someone. You cannot scalp the judge because he has no hair whatsoever. So, you cannot dominate this progress through warfare in any way, it dominates us as a human race, it drives us it shapes our destinies. That is why, after all, conquering of the West was also apologised by "manifest destiny." Pretty bleak, now that I think of it :)
As regards the time and sentence to death, I believe that this is irrelevant: progress will happen in "due" time, the point is that it will happen. However, coming back to the judge: in BM it is stated that everybody has met him and that he will never die. What does that mean? I believe it means that everybody has this wish for security which comes from technological progress in warfare because it ensures oneself that he is capable to defend itself, to survive. But, if you lean too much into it, like Glanton gang leaned into Judge, then this will be your undoing. You will become crazed with power and destruction and in the end this will be your undoing, as it was the undoing of the gang, including the kid. And afterwards, Judge is fiddling and dancing again, singing his "siren song" to new, potential "customers of his services." It is a warning to humanity, also relevant for our tie e.g. lean to much into nuclear deterrent and reap the consequences, which will now be catastrophic. In other words, live by the sword, die by the sword.